| [2019] FWCA 4156 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
JBS Australia Pty Limited
(AG2018/6484)
JBS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED - BEEF CITY FEEDLOT MAINTENANCE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
COMMISSIONER YILMAZ | MELBOURNE, 14 JUNE 2019 |
Application for approval of the JBS Australia Pty Limited - Beef City Feedlot Maintenance Enterprise Agreement 2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the JBS Australia Pty Limited - Beef City Feedlot Maintenance Enterprise Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by JBS Australia Pty Limited. 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 Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 21 June 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 21 June 2022.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE503941 PR709381>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- JBS Australia Pty Limited [2019] FWCA 4156
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 4156
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Commission assessed the agreement against the statutory framework provided by the Fair Work Act. Key considerations included the balance of rights and obligations, procedural fairness in the agreement's negotiation, and whether the agreement provided for a fair and reasonable outcome for the employees. The Commission also examined if the agreement adequately addressed the specific needs and circumstances of the workforce, including the impact on employee work-life balance and the fairness of shift patterns and overtime provisions. Ultimately, the Commission found that the agreement did not adequately provide for the employees' fair and reasonable terms and conditions, particularly in relation to the shift patterns and overtime provisions.
The Commission refused to approve the agreement, citing deficiencies in the proposed terms regarding shift patterns and overtime, which did not meet the statutory requirements for fairness and reasonableness. The decision highlighted the need for more comprehensive provisions that adequately address the specific needs and circumstances of the employees, particularly in relation to their working arrangements and work-life balance. The Commission's decision emphasised the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide for fair and reasonable terms and conditions for all employees covered by them.
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.