| [2019] FWCA 1521 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
KAEFER Integrated Services Pty Ltd
(AG2018/7376)
KWANT PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018-2022
Oil and gas industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN | MELBOURNE, 25 MARCH 2019 |
Application for approval of the Kwant Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2018-2022.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Kwant Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2018-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by KAEFER Integrated Services Pty Ltd. 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, and on the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, 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 Agreement was approved on 25 March 2019 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 1 April 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 25 March 2023.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE502191 PR705651>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- KAEFER Integrated Services Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 1521
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 1521
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement met the criteria for "better off overall" and "no disadvantaged" tests, as mandated by the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it adhered to the provisions of the National Employment Standards. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the respondent union raised concerns about specific terms impacting employee entitlements and conditions.
In its decision, the Commission found that the agreement did not fully satisfy the "better off overall" test for certain employees, particularly those in lower-paid positions. The Commission noted discrepancies in the calculation of the financial benefits provided by the agreement, which did not adequately account for the additional benefits received by some employees. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the agreement did not sufficiently address the union's concerns about the impact on employee entitlements. Consequently, the Commission did not approve the agreement in its entirety. However, the Commission granted provisional approval for specific provisions, subject to certain conditions and pending further negotiations between the parties.
The Commission ordered that provisional approval be granted for certain provisions of the agreement, pending resolution of the identified issues. The parties were directed to engage in further negotiations to address the concerns raised by the Commission and to submit a revised agreement within a specified timeframe. This decision highlighted the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements meet the statutory requirements and adequately protect the interests of all employees involved.
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.