Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Humes

[2013] FWCA 1130

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Humes
(AG2013/4317)

HOLCIM AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED SYDNEY WORKSHOP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER BULL	SYDNEY, 18 FEBRUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Holcim Australia Pty Limited Sydney Workshop Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Holcim Australia Pty Limited Sydney Workshop 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] The Commission requested information with respect to clause 8 - Flexibility, and in particular sub clause 8.1(a) of the Agreement. The Applicant advised that this clause seeks to vary clause 28 - Starting and finishing times and clause 29 - Rostered days off, of the Agreement, by allowing an employee to alter their ordinary hours of work if a particular shift pattern did not fit an employee’s caring responsibilities.

[3] Upon inquiry from the Commission with respect to the scope and coverage of employees covered by the Agreement, the Applicant advised that the Agreement covers maintenance trade employees located at the company’s workshop at Arndell Park which is defined at sub clause 3.1(o) of the Agreement. I am satisfied that pursuant to s.186(3A) of the Act, this group is fairly chosen as being operationally or organisationally distinct.

[4] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval have been met.

[5] The Australian Workers’ Union, the "Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), 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 this organisations.

[6] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) of the Act, the Agreement will operate from 25 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 3 October 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd, trading as Humes, applied for the approval of the Holcim Australia Pty Limited Sydney Workshop Enterprise Agreement 2012 before the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically concerning the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and appropriate, while the respondent contended that certain provisions did not comply with the statutory standards.

The legal issues the court had to address included whether the agreement provided for procedural fairness, contained minimum entitlements, and adhered to the good faith bargaining principles. The court also had to determine if the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of the employer and the employees, considering factors such as wage rates, working hours, leave provisions, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

The Fair Work Commission examined the provisions of the agreement in detail and found that it contained the necessary minimum terms and conditions as required by the Fair Work Act 2009. The court held that the agreement provided for procedural fairness and demonstrated good faith bargaining. After reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, the Commission concluded that the agreement met the legislative requirements and approved it. The decision was based on the understanding that the agreement would provide a fair and effective framework for the employment relationship between Holcim (Australia) Pty Ltd and its employees.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established