DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd
(AG2016/2391)

ARMAGUARD NSW CLERICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Clerical industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 7 APRIL 2016

Application for approval of the Armaguard NSW Clerical and Administrative Employees Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Armaguard NSW Clerical and Administrative Employees Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Transport Workers’ Union of Australia and Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union being the 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) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 14 April 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 13 May 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Armaguard NSW Clerical and Administrative Employees Enterprise Agreement 2015. The application was opposed by the Australian Services Union. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The legal issues involved whether the agreement provided for appropriate mechanisms to ensure its provisions were adhered to and whether it contained all the mandated terms and conditions.

The Commission examined whether the agreement included a dispute resolution procedure, which it found to be lacking. The Commission noted that the agreement did not provide for a formal dispute resolution process, instead relying on an informal process which did not meet the requirements under the Act. Additionally, the Commission found that the agreement did not contain all the mandated terms and conditions, such as provisions for termination of employment, redundancy, and the handling of casual employees. The Commission concluded that these deficiencies meant the agreement did not comply with the statutory requirements for approval.

Based on these findings, the Commission refused to approve the agreement. The Commission emphasised the importance of having a formal dispute resolution procedure and the necessity of including all mandated terms and conditions in an enterprise agreement. As a result, the application was dismissed, and the agreement remained unapproved. The Commission’s decision underscored the importance of compliance with statutory requirements for the approval of enterprise agreements.

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established