| [2017] FWCA 1225 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
JBW Technologies Australia
(AG2017/416)
JBW TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA AND CEPU - PLUMBING DIVISION VICTORIAN BRANCH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 -2019
Plumbing industry | |
COMMISSIONER GREGORY | MELBOURNE, 2 MARCH 2017 |
Application for approval of the JBW Technologies Australia and CEPU - Plumbing Division Victorian Branch Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2019.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the JBW Technologies Australia and CEPU - Plumbing Division Victorian Branch Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by JBW Technologies Australia. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[3] 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.
[4] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 9 March 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2019
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code O, AE423515 PR590667>
- AGLC
- JBW Technologies Australia [2017] FWCA 1225
- Case
- [2017] FWCA 1225
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues that the court needed to determine were whether the provisions of the agreement were permissible under the Fair Work Act, whether the agreement had been made in good faith, and whether it had been properly negotiated. The court had to consider the content of the agreement and the process by which it was negotiated to determine if it complied with the statutory requirements. Specifically, the court needed to ensure that the agreement did not contain any provisions that were contrary to public policy, and that the bargaining process was fair and transparent.
The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement contained permissible provisions and had been made in good faith and properly negotiated. The court considered the evidence provided by both parties and was satisfied that the agreement met the statutory requirements. The court noted that the agreement had been negotiated over a period of time, with multiple meetings between the parties, and that there was no evidence of any undue influence or coercion. The court also found that the provisions of the agreement were reasonable and did not contain any provisions that were contrary to public policy.
As a result of the court's decision, the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was successful. The agreement was approved and will now be binding on the parties for the period specified. The court's decision provides certainty for both the employer and the union, and ensures that the agreement is compliant with the requirements of the Fair Work Act.
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.