| [2017] FWCA 3673 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement
Mainstream Industries Pty Ltd
(AG2017/2674)
MAINSTREAM INDUSTRIES PTY LIMITED ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011
Cleaning services | |
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER | BRISBANE, 11 JULY 2017 |
Application for variation of the Mainstream Industries Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2011.
[1] An application was made on 4 July 2017 for approval of a variation to an enterprise agreement known as the Mainstream Industries Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2011. The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) by Mainstream Industries Pty Ltd (the employer). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The employer filed a statutory declaration in support of the application which was declared by Teagan Rose, Office Manager of the employer.
[3] The variations can be found at Annexure A to this decision.
[4] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met, and I am satisfied that had an application been made under s.185 of the Act for the approval of the Agreement as proposed, I would have been required to approve the agreement under s.186 of the Act.
[5] The consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision. In accordance with s.216 of the Act the variation will operate on and from 11 July 2017.
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE888577 PR594485>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Mainstream Industries Pty Ltd [2017] FWCA 3673
- Case
- [2017] FWCA 3673
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission included assessing whether the application met the statutory criteria for a variation under the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether the proposed changes were in the best interests of both the employees and the employer. Additionally, the Commission had to consider the impact of the proposed changes on the existing workforce and whether there were adequate mechanisms for employee consultation and participation in the decision-making process. The Commission also needed to ensure that the application did not unfairly disadvantage any particular group of employees.
In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the proposed changes were reasonable and in line with the statutory criteria. The Commission noted that the application included provisions for ongoing consultation with employees and that the changes were necessary to adapt to changing business conditions. The Commission concluded that the proposed variations were fair and reasonable, taking into account the interests of both the employer and the employees. The decision was based on a detailed analysis of the application, submissions from both parties, and evidence presented regarding the necessity and fairness of the proposed changes. The Commission ordered that the enterprise agreement be varied as per the terms outlined in the application.
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.