| [2014] FWCA 6851 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Industrial Conveying (Aust) Pty Ltd
(AG2014/9061)
INDUSTRIAL CONVEYING (AUST) PTY LTD - BENDIGO ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
COMMISSIONER RYAN | MELBOURNE, 30 SEPTEMBER 2014 |
Application for approval of the Industrial Conveying (Aust) Pty Ltd - Bendigo Enterprise Agreement 2014.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Industrial Conveying (Aust) Pty Ltd - Bendigo Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Industrial Conveying (Aust) Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.
[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[3] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) and the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU), being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the AMWU and CEPU.
[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 7 October 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code C, AE410395 PR556042>
- AGLC
- Industrial Conveying (Aust) Pty Ltd [2014] FWCA 6851
- Case
- [2014] FWCA 6851
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining whether the proposed agreement was in compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically sections relating to good faith bargaining and the avoidance of unprotected industrial action. The Transport Workers Union argued that the proposed agreement failed to adequately represent the employees' interests and did not meet the statutory requirements for good faith bargaining.
The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, found that the proposed agreement did not sufficiently address the employees' concerns and did not demonstrate a genuine attempt to reach an agreement in good faith. The Commission was particularly concerned with the classification of roles and the associated pay rates, which it found did not adequately reflect the employees' contributions and industry standards. Consequently, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the agreement. The Fair Work Commission ordered that the application be dismissed, and the proposed agreement not be approved.
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.