DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

George Weston Foods Ltd T/A Mauri
(AG2017/3685)

MAURI (CAMELLIA) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
COMMISSIONER MCKINNON	MELBOURNE, 30 NOVEMBER 2017

Application for approval of the MAURI (Camellia) Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the MAURI (Camellia) Enterprise Agreement 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 Ltd T/A Mauri. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[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. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 7 December 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 6 December 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, George Weston Foods Limited, trading as Mauri, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the MAURI (Camellia) Enterprise Agreement 2017. The applicant is a large food manufacturing company, and the dispute involves the terms and conditions of employment for its workforce. The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement was fairly negotiated, if it contained all the mandated terms, and if it was in the best interests of the employees. The Commission needed to ensure that the agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009 and adhered to the principles of procedural fairness and good faith bargaining.

In assessing the application, the Commission considered the process by which the agreement was negotiated and the content of the agreement itself. It examined if the applicant had genuinely attempted to negotiate with the relevant employee representatives and if the agreement had been fairly reached. Furthermore, the Commission evaluated whether the agreement included all the mandatory terms as prescribed by the Fair Work Act and if it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. The Commission also considered if the agreement was in the best interests of the employees by examining factors such as the overall fairness of the terms, the protection of employees' rights, and the promotion of harmonious workplace relations.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement was fairly negotiated and contained all the mandated terms. It concluded that the applicant had engaged in good faith bargaining and had made genuine attempts to reach an agreement with the employee representatives. The Commission determined that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment and was in the best interests of the employees. Accordingly, the Commission approved the MAURI (Camellia) Enterprise Agreement 2017.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the MAURI (Camellia) Enterprise Agreement 2017, effective from the date of the decision. The agreement was to be registered with the Fair Work Commission and would govern the terms and conditions of employment for the relevant employees. The Commission also ordered that the applicant provide a copy of the approved agreement to the relevant employee representatives and to the Fair Work Ombudsman within the specified timeframe.

George Weston Foods Ltd T/A Mauri

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established