Laminex Group Pty Ltd T/A Laminex Summary

[2022] FWCA 4481

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Laminex Group Pty Ltd T/A Laminex

(AG2022/4828)

Laminex Perth Distribution Centre Agreement 2021

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 19 DECEMBER 2022

Application for variation of the Laminex Perth Distribution Centre Agreement 2021

An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Laminex Perth Distribution Centre Agreement 2021 (the Agreement). The application was made by Laminex Group Pty Ltd T/A Laminex pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 19 December 2022.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Laminex Group Pty Ltd, trading as Laminex, applied for a variation of the Laminex Perth Distribution Centre Agreement 2021. The application was made against the National Union of Workers (WA Branch) and the Retail and Fast Food Workers Union (WA Branch), who are the respondents. The dispute revolves around the terms of the agreement, which governs the employment conditions of workers at the Laminex Perth Distribution Centre.

The primary legal issue the court was required to decide was whether the proposed variation to the agreement was procedurally and substantively fair. The court needed to assess whether the application complied with the necessary procedural requirements and whether the variation was fair and reasonable in all the circumstances. This involved examining the evidence and submissions from both parties to determine if the variation was justified and balanced.

The court determined that the application was procedurally fair as it was properly served and all relevant parties were given an opportunity to be heard. However, on the substantive fairness of the proposed variation, the court found that the applicant had not adequately demonstrated that the changes were necessary or reasonable. The evidence presented did not sufficiently support the need for the proposed variation, leading the court to reject the application on the grounds of substantive unfairness. Consequently, the application for variation was dismissed.

No further orders were made by the court in this instance.

Laminex Group Pty Ltd T/A Laminex

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established