Lemnos Foods

[2013] FWCA 721

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Lemnos Foods
(AG2013/119)

LEMNOS FOODS PTY LTD AND NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON	ADELAIDE, 31 JANUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Lemnos Foods Pty Ltd and National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Lemnos Foods Pty Ltd and National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Lemnos Foods. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] 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.

[3] The National Union of Workers, 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 7 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 6 February 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Lemnos Foods Pty Ltd, sought the court's approval of the Lemnos Foods Pty Ltd and National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2012. The respondent, National Union of Workers, opposed the application. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary issue before the Commission was whether the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically whether it contained the minimum terms and conditions mandated by the Act. The Commission had to consider if the agreement was made in good faith and if it was fair and reasonable.

The Commission noted that the application was made under the streamlined process and that the applicant had provided evidence that the agreement was made in good faith. The Commission also found that the agreement contained all the mandated minimum terms and conditions. However, the respondent argued that the agreement did not meet the requirement of being fair and reasonable as it did not provide for adequate consultation and communication processes. The Commission found that the agreement was fair and reasonable as it provided for a mechanism for resolving disputes and allowed for the negotiation of additional terms and conditions. The Commission also noted that the agreement contained provisions for flexible working arrangements and provisions for the protection of employees' health and safety.

In light of the above, the Commission approved the application and authorised the agreement. The Commission found that the agreement met all the requirements of the Fair Work Act and was fair and reasonable. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for adequate consultation and communication processes and contained provisions for the protection of employees' health and safety. The Commission also found that the agreement was made in good faith and contained all the mandated minimum terms and conditions. The Commission authorised the agreement and directed that it be registered with the Fair Work Commission.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established