[2013] FWCA 542 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Kirribilly Viticulture Pty Ltd
(AG2012/14290)
KIRRIBILLY VITICULTURE P/L ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013
Wine industry | |
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON | ADELAIDE, 23 JANUARY 2013 |
Application for approval of the Kirribilly Viticulture P/L Enterprise Agreement 2013.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Kirribilly Viticulture P/L Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Kirribilly Viticulture Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.
[2] On 22 January 2013, I conducted a telephone conference of the parties to seek clarification about aspects of the agreement.
[3] The employer subsequently provided further clarification of the parties’ intentions and proposed formal written undertakings which are appended to the agreement as approved.
[4] I have sought the views of the bargaining representatives and accepted the undertakings pursuant to s.190 of the Act. As a result, the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.
[5] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with clause 5 of the Agreement, will operate from 6 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 5 February 2016.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code C, AE899530 PR533460>
- AGLC
- Kirribilly Viticulture Pty Ltd [2013] FWCA 542
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 542
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court had to resolve included whether the agreement met the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act, including the necessity of genuine bargaining and the application of the "better off overall test." The court also needed to examine if the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, considering the balance of rights and obligations between the employer and the employees.
The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements for genuine bargaining as there had been no meaningful negotiation process. Additionally, the commission determined that the proposed terms did not satisfy the better off overall test, as employees would be worse off under the new agreement. Consequently, the application for approval was dismissed, and the 2011 agreement remained in force.
The Fair Work Commission ordered that the 2013 agreement not be approved, and the 2011 agreement continued to apply to the employees until a new agreement was properly negotiated and 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.