Harsco Metals & Minerals Australia Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 2180

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Harsco Metals & Minerals Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2013/746)

HARSCO METALS, ONE STEEL LAVERTON, ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 10 APRIL 2013

Application for approval of the Harsco Metals, One Steel Laverton, Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Harsco Metals, One Steel Laverton, Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Harsco Metals & Minerals Australia Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] An undertaking has been given in relation to clause 32.8.5 of the Agreement and this undertaking has become a term of the Agreement in accordance with s.191(2) of the Act and is appended at Appendix A.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 17 April 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2013.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE400704 PR535559>
APPENDIX A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Harsco Metals & Minerals Australia Pty Ltd, the employer, sought approval of the Harsco Metals, One Steel Laverton, Enterprise Agreement 2012 from the Fair Work Commission. The union, United Voice, representing the employees, contested the application. The dispute centred on the proposed terms and conditions within the agreement, including issues such as wage rates, penalty rates, and procedural fairness during negotiations.

The Fair Work Commission was required to determine whether the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court needed to assess if the agreement was made in good faith, if it met the "better off overall test," and if it contained the necessary procedural fairness. The union argued that the agreement did not provide fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees and questioned the fairness of the negotiation process.

In evaluating the application, the Fair Work Commission considered the evidence presented by both parties and the statutory requirements. The Commission found that the agreement met the good faith criteria and satisfied the better off overall test, which meant that the employees would be no worse off and at least some would be better off financially. Additionally, the Commission determined that the procedural fairness requirements were met, as there was evidence of a genuine attempt to negotiate with the union. Therefore, the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was approved.

The Fair Work Commission's final order was that the Harsco Metals, One Steel Laverton, Enterprise Agreement 2012 be approved, effective from the date of the decision. The agreement would now form the basis of the terms and conditions for the employees within the organisation.

Harsco Metals & Minerals Australia Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established