Hafele Australia Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 859

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Hafele Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2013/4708)

HAFELE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Storage services
JUSTICE BOULTON, SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT	MELBOURNE, 8 FEBRUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Hafele Australia Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for the approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Hafele Australia Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2012 (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 ss.186, 187 and 188 that are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[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) of the Act, I note the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 8 February 2016.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hafele Australia Pty Ltd sought approval for the Hafele Australia Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2012 from the Fair Work Commission. The agreement was intended to govern the employment conditions of workers employed by Hafele Australia. The application was contested by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), which argued that the agreement did not meet the legal requirements for approval.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved assessing whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether it contained the necessary minimum terms and conditions. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement met the requirement of being a "better off overall test" for the employees.

The Commission found that the agreement was genuinely negotiated and contained the requisite minimum terms and conditions. It was also determined that the agreement met the "better off overall test," as it provided a fair and reasonable outcome for the employees. The Commission approved the enterprise agreement, highlighting that it provided a balanced approach to the rights and obligations of both the employer and the employees. The decision was made in light of the specific circumstances of the agreement and the need to promote harmonious workplace relations. The Commission's decision was based on a comprehensive analysis of the evidence and the applicable legal framework.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established