Johnson Matthey (Aust) Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 1874

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Johnson Matthey (Aust) Ltd
(AG2013/596)

JOHNSON MATTHEY AND AWU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012-2014

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER GOOLEY	MELBOURNE, 26 MARCH 2013

Application for approval of the Johnson Matthey and AWU Enterprise Agreement 2012-2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Johnson Matthey and AWU Enterprise Agreement 2012-2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Johnson Matthey (Aust) Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant 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 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union, 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 was approved on 25 March 2013 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 1 April 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 November 2014.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE400485 PR535186>
ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Johnson Matthey (Aust) Ltd sought approval of an enterprise agreement with the Australian Workers Union (AWU) for the period 2012-2014. The application was made in the Fair Work Commission. The central dispute revolved around whether the enterprise agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to the procedural fairness and the protection of employees' rights. The AWU argued that the agreement did not adequately safeguard employees' rights, while Johnson Matthey (Aust) Ltd maintained that the agreement was in compliance with the relevant legislative framework.

The court needed to determine whether the enterprise agreement met the necessary standards of procedural fairness and protection of employee rights as stipulated by the Fair Work Act. This involved examining the process through which the agreement was negotiated and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms for employees. The court also had to consider whether the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of the employer and the employees. The primary focus was on whether the agreement complied with the mandatory provisions of the Fair Work Act and if it was fair and reasonable in all its terms.

The Fair Work Commission found that the enterprise agreement was procedurally sound and did not infringe upon the rights of employees. The Commission held that the agreement was negotiated in good faith and that the process was transparent and inclusive, providing adequate opportunity for employee representation. The Commission further determined that the agreement's terms were fair and reasonable, offering appropriate protections and benefits to employees. Therefore, the Commission approved the application for the enterprise agreement to be registered.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Johnson Matthey and AWU Enterprise Agreement 2012-2014, confirming its compliance with the Fair Work Act. The court's decision provided clarity on the procedural fairness and protection of employee rights in the context of enterprise agreements, reinforcing the standards expected under the legislative framework.

Johnson Matthey (Aust) Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established