Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd

Case [2013] FWCA 1887


[2013] FWCA 1887

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd
(AG2013/5695)

KOOKABURRA SPORT PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Manufacturing and associated industries

COMMISSIONER RYAN

MELBOURNE, 26 MARCH 2013

Application for approval of the Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] United Voice, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 2 April 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 25 March 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE400494  PR535200>

Details
AGLC
Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd [2013] FWCA 1887
Case
[2013] FWCA 1887
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Kookaburra Sport Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the 2013 Enterprise Agreement. The applicant, a manufacturer of sporting goods, sought to secure the terms and conditions of employment for its employees under the proposed agreement. The dispute involved the union, which represented the employees, objecting to certain provisions of the agreement.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, including whether it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions. Specifically, the union argued that certain clauses related to pay rates, shift patterns, and redundancy were unfair and did not meet the 'better off overall test'. The union contended that the proposed changes would negatively impact employee conditions and job security.

The Fair Work Commission carefully examined the provisions of the agreement, considering the evidence presented by both parties. The Commission found that, while some of the union's concerns were valid, the overall agreement met the statutory requirements. The Commission determined that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including that employees would be better off overall. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, finding that it complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act.

No specific orders were made, as the Commission's decision to approve the agreement was the final outcome of the application.

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.