DECISION

Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009
Item 16 Sch. 3—Termination of transitional instrument

Lackey’s Nominees T/A Cripps D T & J L Bakery
(AG2016/4623)

CRIPPS BAKERY EMPLOYEE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT

Tasmania
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER	SYDNEY, 19 AUGUST 2016

Termination of the Cripps Bakery Employee Collective Agreement.

[1] On 25 July 2016, Lackey’s Nominees T/A Cripps D T & J L Bakery made an application to terminate the Cripps Bakery Employee Collective Agreement (the Agreement) under item 16 of schedule 3 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Cth) (the TPCA Act).

[2] Item 16 of schedule 3 of the TPCA Act provides that Subdivision D of Division 7 of Part 2-4 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) applies in relation to a collective agreement-based transitional instrument as if a reference to an enterprise agreement included a reference to a collective agreement-based transitional instrument. Accordingly, I must terminate the Agreement if I am satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act.

[3] There are no employee organisations covered by the Agreement. No opposition to the application was received from or on behalf of any parties. Having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[4] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an application by the Bakers' Union of Australia to have the Cripps Bakery Employee Collective Agreement reinstated. The applicants were seeking to enforce the agreement which had been terminated by the respondents, Lackey’s Nominees T/A Cripps D T & J L Bakery. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issue was whether the termination of the collective agreement was lawful. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the respondents had complied with the necessary procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009 when terminating the agreement. The union argued that the termination was invalid due to non-compliance with these procedures. The respondents, on the other hand, asserted that the termination was valid and that they had followed the correct procedures.

The court examined the procedural steps taken by the respondents in terminating the agreement. It considered whether the respondents had given the requisite notice to the union and whether they had attempted to negotiate in good faith. The court found that the respondents had not provided the union with adequate notice of the termination, and had failed to engage in meaningful negotiations. Consequently, the court ruled that the termination was unlawful and reinstated the collective agreement. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to procedural requirements when terminating a collective agreement to ensure fairness and compliance with the law.

The court ordered that the Cripps Bakery Employee Collective Agreement be reinstated, effective from the date of the termination. The respondents were also directed to compensate the union for any losses incurred as a result of the unlawful termination. This decision underscores the necessity for employers to strictly follow legal procedures when altering or terminating collective agreements to maintain industrial harmony and compliance with employment laws.

Lackey’s Nominees T/A Cripps D T & J L Bakery

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established