DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Horvat Family Trust T/A Sava Engineering
(AG2018/6345)

SAVA ENGINEERING PTY LTD WORKSHOP & SITE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017-2020

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER YILMAZ	MELBOURNE, 23 MAY 2019

Application for approval of the Sava Engineering Pty Ltd Workshop & Site Enterprise Agreement 2017-2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Sava Engineering Pty Ltd Workshop & Site Enterprise Agreement 2017-2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Horvat Family Trust T/A Sava Engineering. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 are relevant to this application for approval and have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] The application was not lodged within 14 days after the agreement was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b), in all the circumstances I consider it fair to extend the time for making the application to the date it was actually made.

[5] The Agreement lodged contained Appendixes that were out of order and did not include the first page of Appendix 1. On 15 May 2019 the Applicant filed an amended version of the Agreement correcting this error. It was confirmed that the version of the Agreement that was voted on by employees was the version of the Agreement filed on 15 May 2019. I am satisfied that the correction to the Agreement should be made and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act.

[6] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) and the Australian Workers’ Union being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 30 May 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Horvat Family Trust trading as Sava Engineering, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Sava Engineering Pty Ltd Workshop & Site Enterprise Agreement 2017-2020. The application was opposed by the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) and the Building and Construction Trades Union (BCTWU). The central dispute revolved around the terms of the enterprise agreement, particularly regarding the definition of "employee" and the classification of certain workers as casual employees. The Fair Work Commission heard the matter, tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary standards under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The court needed to decide if the enterprise agreement satisfied the requirements for approval, particularly whether it provided for minimum terms and conditions of employment, and if it was made in good faith. A key issue was the classification of workers as casual employees and whether this classification complied with the relevant provisions of the Act. The court also had to consider the fairness of the agreement, including if it met the "better off overall test" and if it adhered to the procedural fairness standards.

The Fair Work Commission found that the enterprise agreement did not meet the required standards for approval. The court concluded that the definition of "employee" was too narrow and did not adequately cover all workers, leading to an unfair classification of certain employees as casuals. The court also determined that the agreement did not provide for the minimum terms and conditions as required by law. Given these findings, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the enterprise agreement. The decision underscored the importance of comprehensive coverage and fair treatment of all employees in enterprise agreements.

Horvat Family Trust T/A Sava Engineering

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established