DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Lintin Geotechnical Pty Ltd
(AG2016/7711)

LINTIN GEOTECHNICAL PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Northern Territory
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS	SYDNEY, 10 FEBRUARY 2017

Application for approval of the LINTIN Geotechnical Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the LINTIN Geotechnical Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Lintin Geotechnical Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings (the 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 Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 17 February 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 9 February 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lintin Geotechnical Pty Ltd, an employer, applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the LINTIN Geotechnical Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016. The application involved employees who were part of various unions, including the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The unions opposed the approval on several grounds, including that the agreement failed to provide adequate protections for employees.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the agreement met the necessary standards for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees. Key points of contention included the agreement's provisions regarding shift penalties, penalty rates for public holidays, and the classification of employees. The unions argued that the agreement did not provide adequate protections for employees and was therefore not in the best interests of the employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that while the agreement contained some provisions that did not meet the standards for approval, it did not consider the overall agreement to be contrary to the public interest. The court emphasised that the agreement provided reasonable terms and conditions for the employees and that the parties had demonstrated a genuine willingness to negotiate. The Commission approved the agreement with modifications to address the unions' concerns about shift penalties and public holiday penalty rates. These modifications ensured that the agreement would provide fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees.

Lintin Geotechnical 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