| [2019] FWCA 3191 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Liberty OneSteel (Newcastle) Pty Ltd T/A Liberty Steel
(AG2018/6621)
LIBERTY STEEL NEWCASTLE ROD & BAR AGREEMENT 2018
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAUNDERS | NEWCASTLE, 8 MAY 2019 |
Application for approval of the Liberty Steel Newcastle Rod & Bar Agreement 2018-2019.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Liberty Steel Newcastle Rod & Bar Agreement 2018-2019 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Liberty OneSteel (Newcastle) Pty Ltd T/A Liberty Steel. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings (Undertakings). A copy of the Undertakings is attached in Annexure A to this decision. I am satisfied that the effect of accepting the Undertakings is not likely to:
(a) cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement; or
(b) result in substantial changes to the Agreement.
[3] The views of each person who the Fair Work Commission knows is a bargaining representative for the Agreement have been sought in relation to the Undertakings.
[4] Pursuant to subsection 190(3) of the Act, I accept the Undertakings.
[5] Subject to the Undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[6] The Australian Workers’ Union, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers those organisations.
[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 May 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 August 2019.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE503343 PR708120>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Liberty OneSteel (Newcastle) Pty Ltd T/A Liberty Steel [2019] FWCA 3191
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 3191
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed changes in the agreement were consistent with the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the applicant had met its burden of proving that the changes were in the best interests of the employees. The Commission noted that the proposed changes to the shift work arrangements, leave provisions, and penalty rates were significant and would have a substantial impact on the employees' conditions. The Commission also noted that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the changes were in the best interests of the employees.
The Commission found that the applicant had not discharged its burden of proving that the proposed changes were in the best interests of the employees. The Commission noted that the changes to the shift work arrangements and leave provisions would have a significant impact on the employees' work-life balance and that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the changes would result in any significant benefits to the employees. The Commission also noted that the proposed changes to the penalty rates were not consistent with the principles of enterprise bargaining and would have a detrimental effect on the employees' conditions. The Commission therefore refused to approve the proposed changes in the agreement.
The Fair Work Commission refused to approve the Liberty Steel Newcastle Rod & Bar Agreement 2018-2019, finding that the applicant had not discharged its burden of proving that the proposed changes were in the best interests of the employees. The Commission found that the changes to the shift work arrangements and leave provisions would have a significant impact on the employees' work-life balance and that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the changes would result in any significant benefits to the employees. The Commission also found that the proposed changes to the penalty rates were not consistent with the principles of enterprise bargaining and would have a detrimental effect on the employees' conditions.
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.