[2014] FWCA 4695 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
M Power U Pty Ltd ATF the Montini Family Trust T/A M Power U Electrical Contracting
(AG2014/6315)
M POWER U ELECTRICAL CONTRACTING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2018
Electrical contracting industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY | PERTH, 17 JULY 2014 |
Application for approval of the M Power U Electrical Contracting Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the M Power U Electrical Contracting Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). 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] I had some concerns regarding the superannuation clause in the Agreement. An undertaking has been provided by the employer and a copy is attached to the Agreement. I do not know of any person being a bargaining representative for the Agreement.
[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is four years from the date of this decision.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE409066 PR553089>
- AGLC
- M Power U Pty Ltd ATF the Montini Family Trust T/A M Power U Electrical Contracting [2014] FWCA 4695
- Case
- [2014] FWCA 4695
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue that the Commission had to address was whether the agreement met the criteria for approval as stipulated in the Fair Work Act. This involved examining whether the agreement provided for adequate protections of employees' rights and entitlements, as well as whether it complied with the procedural requirements for enterprise agreements. The Commission needed to consider the provisions of the agreement and the submissions made by both parties to determine if the agreement was fair and appropriate for the employees it covered.
The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not adequately protect employees' rights and entitlements. The Commission highlighted several deficiencies, including the lack of provisions for minimum wages and entitlements, inadequate provisions for leave and penalty rates, and insufficient mechanisms for dispute resolution. The Commission also noted procedural shortcomings in the process of bargaining the agreement. Based on these findings, the Commission concluded that the agreement did not meet the statutory criteria for approval. Consequently, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed.
The Fair Work Commission did not make any orders as the application for approval was dismissed. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide comprehensive protections for employees and adhere to the statutory requirements for approval.
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.