| [2019] FWCA 3687 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.225 - Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date
Haddcorp Pty LTD T/A Tamworth Telstra Store
(AG2019/1468)
HADDCORP PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2009
Retail industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT BULL | SYDNEY, 28 MAY 2019 |
Application for termination of the the Haddcorp Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2009.
[1] On 3 May 2019, HaddCorp Pty Ltd applied for the termination of the Haddcorp Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2009 (the Agreement), under s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
[2] The application pursuant to s.225 of the Act states:
“225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date
If an enterprise agreement has passed its nominal expiry date, any of the following may apply to the FWC for the termination of the agreement:
(a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;
(b) an employee covered by the agreement;
(c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.”
[3] The applicant is an employer covered by the Agreement and thus has standing to make the termination application. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date of 30 September 2012.
[4] Section 226 of the Act sets out when the Commission must terminate an expired enterprise agreement where an application to terminate an agreement is made.
“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement
“If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:
(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and
(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:
(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and
(ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”
[5] The applicant’s statutory declaration by Ms Katherine Hayward states that 70 employees are covered by this Agreement.
[6] The Employee signatures provided in support of the termination of the Agreement are said by Ms Katherine Hayward as a cross section of employees covered by the Agreement.
[7] The Agreement does not cover any employee organisations.
[8] Pursuant to s.225 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.
[9] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE872542 PR708774>
- AGLC
- Haddcorp Pty LTD T/A Tamworth Telstra Store [2019] FWCA 3687
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 3687
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue was whether the prerequisites for terminating an enterprise agreement were satisfied. The Fair Work Act permits termination if the commission is satisfied that there is insufficient bargaining power on either side, or if it is satisfied that the agreement is no longer appropriate for the employees or the employer. The court needed to determine whether there was a genuine dispute over the existence or exercise of bargaining power and if the agreement was no longer suitable for the employees or employer.
The commission considered the evidence presented regarding the bargaining power of both parties and the appropriateness of the agreement. It concluded that there was no genuine dispute over bargaining power and that the agreement was no longer appropriate due to changes in the nature of the business and the working conditions. The commission found that the applicant had met the criteria for termination, and therefore, the enterprise agreement was terminated.
As a result of the decision, the Tamworth Telstra Store is now governed by the relevant industry award rather than the enterprise agreement. The termination of the agreement will have implications for the terms and conditions of employment for the staff at the store, including wages, hours of work, and other employment-related matters. The decision provides clarity for both parties regarding the employment conditions moving forward.
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.