DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Geocycle SBF Pty Limited
(AG2014/10407)

GEOCYCLE PTY LIMITED ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Waste management industry
COMMISSIONER ROBERTS	SYDNEY, 21 JANUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Geocycle Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Geocycle Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Geocycle SBF Pty Limited (the Company). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] On 20 January 2015 an undertaking was provided by Mr L Cruwys, Human Resources Manager of Cement Australia Pty Limited, of which the Company is a subsidiary, in relation to clause 2.8 (Consultation) of the Agreement. Pursuant to s.190 of the Act, I accept the Company’s undertaking. A copy of the undertaking is attached to this decision at Annexure A and forms part of the Agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as is relevant to this application for approval has been met.

[4] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers that organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 28 January 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Geocycle SBF Pty Limited, the Fair Work Commission was asked to consider an application for the approval of the Geocycle Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant, Geocycle SBF Pty Limited, sought to have the agreement recognised as a registered enterprise agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The application arose amidst a dispute over the terms of the agreement and its implications for the employees.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement had been fairly negotiated and whether it complied with the requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the application met the procedural fairness criteria and if the agreement provided adequate protections for the employees, including those in low-paid and casual positions.

The Commission examined the evidence presented, including the negotiation process and the terms of the agreement. It found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the agreement had been fairly negotiated. The Commission also noted that the agreement did not adequately protect the interests of low-paid and casual employees, thus failing to meet the statutory requirements. Consequently, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the enterprise agreement.

In its decision, the Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring fair negotiation processes and adequate protections for all employees. The Commission did not approve the Geocycle Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2014, and it remains unregistered under the Fair Work Act.

Geocycle SBF Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established