DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd
(AG2015/1447)

HOLMES NOMINEES (AUST) PTY LTD COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015-2018

Cement and concrete products
COMMISSIONER BLAIR	MELBOURNE, 3 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd Collective Agreement 2015-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd Collective Agreement 2015-2018. (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd (the Applicant).

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

[3] Pursuant to s.190 of the Act, the Applicant has given the undertaking attached to this decision and to the Agreement. In accordance with ss. 191(1) and 201(3) of the Act I note that the undertaking is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 10 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2018.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd, sought approval of a collective agreement covering the period 2015 to 2018. The applicants argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the respondents, represented by the Australian Council of Trade Unions, contended that the agreement contained terms that were not fairly and reasonably negotiated and were not in the best interests of the employees. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issues in the case revolved around whether the collective agreement was fairly and reasonably negotiated and if it contained terms that were in the best interests of the employees. The Commission had to assess the process of negotiation, the content of the agreement, and the potential impact on the employees. The fairness and reasonableness of the agreement were evaluated against the statutory criteria set out in the Fair Work Act 2009.

The Commission considered the evidence presented regarding the negotiation process and found that the agreement was indeed fairly and reasonably negotiated. It also found that the terms of the agreement were in the best interests of the employees, taking into account the economic and social context of the workplace. The Commission concluded that the agreement met the statutory criteria and approved it accordingly.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd Collective Agreement 2015-2018, finding that it was fairly and reasonably negotiated and contained terms in the best interests of the employees. The decision provides a clear example of how the Commission evaluates collective agreements under the Fair Work Act.

Holmes Nominees (Aust) Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established