| [2019] FWCA 6655 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Hume Doors & Timber (Qld) Pty Ltd
(AG2019/3216)
HUME DOORS & TIMBER (QLD) PTY LTD EMPLOYEE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019
Timber and paper products industry | |
COMMISSIONER BOOTH | BRISBANE, 24 SEPTEMBER 2019 |
Application for approval of the Hume Doors & Timber (QLD) Pty Ltd Employee Collective Agreement 2019.
[1] An application has been made under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Hume Doors & Timber (Qld) Pty Ltd (the Applicant) for approval of the Hume Doors & Timber (QLD) Pty Ltd Employee Collective Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] Correspondence was sent to the Applicant and the bargaining representatives on 1 6 September 2019, raising a number of concerns in relation to the Agreement.
[3] The Applicant provided submissions and undertakings addressing the concerns raised, on 17 September 2019. Amended undertakings were provided to Chambers on 19 September 2019.
[4] The amended undertakings meets the requirements of s.190(3) of the Act and I have accepted them. As a result, the undertakings are then to be a term of the Agreement and are attached to this Decision as Attachment A.
[5] Subject to the undertakings provided, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 7 days from the date of approval of the Agreement. The nominal expiry date is 15 August 2023.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE505449 PR712757>
Attachment A
- AGLC
- Hume Doors & Timber (Qld) Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 6655
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 6655
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues were whether the Agreement provided for terms and conditions that were no less favourable than the relevant award and whether it complied with the procedural requirements set forth in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to assess if the Agreement included all the minimum terms and conditions specified in the relevant award and whether it was made in accordance with the prescribed consultation process. Additionally, the Commission considered whether the Agreement contained any terms that would have an adverse financial impact on employees.
The Fair Work Commission found that the proposed Agreement did not meet the statutory requirements. The Commission noted that the Agreement did not include all the minimum terms and conditions of the relevant award. Moreover, it was determined that the Agreement contained terms that were less favourable to employees in relation to wages and entitlements. The Commission also found procedural deficiencies in the consultation process, which was not conducted in accordance with the Fair Work Act. As a result, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the Agreement.
Consequently, the Commission did not approve the proposed Agreement. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that any collective agreement complies with both substantive and procedural requirements under the Fair Work Act. Employers must ensure that their agreements do not disadvantage employees and adhere to the necessary consultation processes.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.