| [2017] FWCA 4406 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
George Weston Foods T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria
(AG2017/2474)
TIP TOP BAKERIES OPERATIONS (VICTORIA) AGREEMENT 2017
Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry | |
COMMISSIONER WILSON | MELBOURNE, 24 AUGUST 2017 |
Application for approval of the Tip Top Bakeries Operations (Victoria) Agreement 2017.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Tip Top Bakeries Operations (Victoria) 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 T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria. 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] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia and United Voice being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 31 August 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 March 2020.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code J, AE425248 PR595575>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- George Weston Foods T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria [2017] FWCA 4406
- Case
- [2017] FWCA 4406
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court centred on whether the agreement was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the process followed was procedurally fair. The union argued that there were significant procedural deficiencies, including inadequate consultation and the exclusion of key stakeholders, which rendered the agreement invalid. Additionally, the union contended that the terms of the agreement were not in the best interests of the employees, particularly concerning wage rates and conditions.
The Commission found that while there were procedural shortcomings in the agreement process, these did not invalidate the agreement itself. The Commission concluded that the overall process was fair enough, and the terms of the agreement were reasonable and in the best interests of the employees. The decision underscored the importance of procedural fairness but also recognised the need to balance this with the practicality of reaching agreements in a workplace context. The application for approval of the agreement was ultimately granted, with some minor amendments to address the identified procedural issues.
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.