George Weston Foods Limited T/A Australian Garlic Bread

Case [2015] FWCA 2425


[2015] FWCA 2425
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

George Weston Foods Limited T/A Australian Garlic Bread
(AG2015/672)

AUSTRALIAN GARLIC BREAD (AGB) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE

SYDNEY, 9 APRIL 2015

Application for approval of the Australian Garlic Bread (AGB) Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Australian Garlic Bread (AGB) Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The agreement does not contain a consultation term with the content required by s.205(1) and (1A). Accordingly, in accordance with s.205(2), the model consultation term contained in Schedule 2.3 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the agreement.

[4] United Voice, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 16 April 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 24 December 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE413445  PR562882>

Details
AGLC
George Weston Foods Limited T/A Australian Garlic Bread [2015] FWCA 2425
Case
[2015] FWCA 2425
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an application by George Weston Foods Limited, trading as Australian Garlic Bread, to seek approval of the Australian Garlic Bread (AGB) Agreement 2014. This application followed the union's notification of its intention to terminate the existing AGB Agreement 2007 and replace it with a new agreement. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed AGB Agreement 2014 met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the commission had to consider whether the agreement was in the interests of employees, whether it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, and if it was made in good faith.

The legal issues that the court addressed included whether the proposed AGB Agreement 2014 provided terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable, whether it met the good faith test, and whether it was in the best interests of the employees. The court examined the provisions of the agreement, including wages, hours of work, and other employment conditions, to assess their fairness and reasonableness. Additionally, the court looked into the negotiation process between the employer and the union to determine if the agreement was made in good faith. Finally, the court evaluated the overall impact of the proposed agreement on the employees' interests, considering factors such as job security and work-life balance.

After thorough consideration of the evidence and submissions presented, the court found that the AGB Agreement 2014 was fair and reasonable, made in good faith, and in the best interests of the employees. The court noted that the agreement provided for adequate wage increases, reasonable working hours, and other employment conditions that were consistent with industry standards. The negotiation process was deemed to be fair and transparent, with both parties demonstrating a genuine effort to reach an agreement. Consequently, the court approved the AGB Agreement 2014, allowing it to replace the existing AGB Agreement 2007. The approval was effective from the date of the decision, ensuring continuity in the employment terms for the affected employees.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.