DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

George Weston Foods Limited T/A George Weston Foods Speedibake
(AG2016/142)

SPEEDIBAKE ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015-2017

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	SYDNEY, 9 FEBRUARY 2016

Application for approval of the Speedibake Engineering Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Speedibake Engineering Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by George Weston Foods Limited T/A George Weston Foods Speedibake. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The National Union of Workers being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 9 February 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 16 February 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 September 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Price code G, AE417743 PR576832

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the applicant, George Weston Foods Limited trading as George Weston Foods Speedibake, sought approval for the Speedibake Engineering Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017. The agreement in question was made between the applicant and the respondent, the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness of the process through which the applicant had sought to implement the agreement, specifically whether the applicant had appropriately consulted with the union during the process.

The legal issues before the court revolved around the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly sections that mandate good faith bargaining and procedural fairness in the context of enterprise agreements. The key issue was whether the applicant had complied with the procedural requirements in the Act when implementing the agreement, including whether the applicant had genuinely sought to bargain in good faith and had provided adequate consultation with the union.

The Commission found that the applicant had failed to demonstrate that it had genuinely sought to bargain in good faith and had not provided adequate consultation to the union. The Commission noted that the applicant had not provided the union with information that was necessary for effective bargaining, and had not engaged in meaningful discussions with the union. As a result, the Commission determined that the applicant had breached the procedural fairness requirements of the Act. Consequently, the Commission did not approve the agreement.

In light of the Commission's findings, it was not necessary to make any further orders. The Commission's decision stands as the final outcome of the matter, with the Speedibake Engineering Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017 not being approved due to the applicant's failure to comply with the procedural fairness requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

George Weston Foods Limited T/A George Weston Foods Speedibake

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established