Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 7246

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2013/2689)

KOMATSU AUSTRALIA SOUTH EAST QUEENSLAND SERVICE, ASSEMBLY AND REMAN DEPARTMENTS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Manufacturing and associated industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE	SYDNEY, 20 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Komatsu Australia South East Queensland Service, Assembly and Reman Departments Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Komatsu Australia South East Queensland Service, Assembly and Reman Departments 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 Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd. 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 “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) 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.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 20 September 2013 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 September 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 May 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Komatsu Australia South East Queensland Service, Assembly and Reman Departments Enterprise Agreement 2013. The applicant sought to have the agreement approved under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009 as a simple or low risk agreement. The dispute arose from disagreements over the terms and conditions of employment for certain employees within the specified departments of the applicant's company. The Fair Work Commission was the court in this matter, given its jurisdiction over enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement met the criteria for approval as a simple or low-risk agreement. This involved assessing whether the agreement contained only the terms prescribed by the Act, whether it was a genuinely agreed upon enterprise agreement, and whether it complied with the "better off overall test" as required by the Act. The Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided for terms and conditions that were no worse off than the relevant awards or the general industrial awards, and whether it provided for terms and conditions that were better off overall for the employees covered by the agreement.

In examining the application, the Commission found that the agreement contained only the terms prescribed by the Act and that it was genuinely agreed upon by the applicant and the relevant union. The Commission also determined that the agreement satisfied the better off overall test, as it provided for terms and conditions that were no worse off than the relevant awards and provided better outcomes for the employees. The Commission took into account the views of the employees, the employer, and the union representatives in making its decision. Ultimately, the Commission was satisfied that the agreement met all the necessary criteria for approval.

Consequently, the Fair Work Commission approved the application for the agreement to be registered as a low-risk agreement. The approval was based on the finding that the agreement was genuinely agreed upon, contained only prescribed terms, and complied with the better off overall test. The agreement was registered under the Fair Work Act, and it became the governing agreement for the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement.

Komatsu Australia Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established