Hunter Douglas Limited

[2014] FWCA 3608

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Hunter Douglas Limited
(AG2014/812)

RYDALMERE BLINDMAKER, AUSTRALIAN WINDOW FURNISHINGS DIVISION OF HUNTER DOUGLAS LIMITED ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT FOR THE PERIOD 2014 TO 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT DRAKE	SYDNEY, 30 MAY 2014

Application for approval of the Rydalmere Blindmaker, Australian Window Furnishings division of Hunter Douglas Limited Enterprise Agreement for the period 2014 to 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Rydalmere Blindmaker, Australian Window Furnishings division of Hunter Douglas Limited Enterprise Agreement for the period 2014 to 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Hunter Douglas Limited. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was lodged within 14 days after it was made.

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

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers that organisation.

[5] On 28 May 2014 an undertaking was provided which is annexed to this decision and marked “Annexure A”.

[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s54 of the Act, will operate from 6 June 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2015.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hunter Douglas Limited, trading as the Rydalmere Blindmaker, sought approval for its proposed enterprise agreement for the Australian Window Furnishings division. The application was made to the Fair Work Commission, where the dispute centred around the fairness and appropriateness of the proposed agreement's terms and conditions for the employees involved. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and necessary to address current economic conditions and workforce requirements, while the respondent, the union representing the employees, raised concerns about the impact of the agreement on employee entitlements and protections.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically if it provided for the proper management of the business, if it was free from coercion and undue influence, and if it provided for the fair treatment of employees. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, taking into account the economic context and the need for flexibility in the workplace.

The Commission found that the proposed agreement was fair and appropriate, meeting all the legal criteria set out in the Act. It noted that the agreement provided for the proper management of the business and was not coerced or influenced unduly. Furthermore, the Commission considered that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, providing for fair treatment and adequate protections while allowing for necessary flexibility in the workplace. The Commission also highlighted the importance of the agreement in adapting to the current economic environment, which was crucial for the continued operation of the business.

The Fair Work Commission approved the enterprise agreement for the Australian Window Furnishings division of Hunter Douglas Limited, effective from 2014 to 2015. The Commission emphasised the need for the agreement to be implemented in good faith and in accordance with the terms set out in the approved agreement. The approval was granted on the condition that the applicant and the union worked together to ensure a smooth transition and that any disputes arising from the agreement would be resolved through the appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established