GEA Pty Ltd Summary | CaseChat AU

[2014] FWCA 910

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

GEA Pty Ltd
(AG2013/10467)

GEA PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013 - 2017

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC	MELBOURNE, 5 FEBRUARY 2014

Application for approval of the GEA Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the GEA Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by GEA Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] Subject to concerns that have been addressed by way of undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] As noted, pursuant to s.190(3), I have accepted undertakings from GEA Pty Ltd. In accordance with s.191(1) of the Act the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertakings are attached to this decision.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 12 February 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 11 February 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved GEA Pty Ltd, an Australian company, and its employees represented by a trade union. The union sought approval for an enterprise agreement between the company and its employees covering the period 2013 to 2017. The Fair Work Commission was the court responsible for reviewing and approving the agreement.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, including whether it met the "better off overall test" (BOOT). This test required that employees be no worse off financially under the new agreement compared to their previous conditions. The Commission also needed to consider if the agreement included all necessary terms and conditions as per the Act, and if there was genuine agreement between the parties.

The Fair Work Commission found that the proposed agreement did not meet the BOOT as some employees would be worse off financially. Additionally, the Commission noted several deficiencies in the agreement, including the omission of certain terms and conditions as required by the Act. The Commission also determined that there was insufficient evidence to establish genuine agreement between the parties. Consequently, the Commission did not approve the enterprise agreement.

The Fair Work Commission refused to approve the proposed enterprise agreement due to non-compliance with the BOOT, missing terms and conditions, and a lack of evidence of genuine agreement. This decision highlights the importance of ensuring all legal requirements are met and that there is genuine consensus when negotiating and finalising enterprise agreements.

GEA Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established