DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Manildra Harwood Sugars T/A Sunshine Sugar
(AG2017/6086)

SUNSHINE SUGAR ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Sugar industry
COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE	SYDNEY, 4 MAY 2018

Application for approval of the Sunshine Sugar Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Sunshine Sugar Enterprise Agreement 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s. 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Manildra Harwood Sugars (the Employer). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The application was lodged with the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) at Sydney on 7 December 2017. On 24 April 2018, the application was referred to the Commission as currently constituted. The application included a Statutory Declaration of Glenn Parker made on behalf of the Employer and dated 30 November 2017 (the Declaration). The Declaration stated that the Agreement was made on 27 November 2017. Therefore the application was lodged within the 14 day time limit established by subsection 185 (3) of the Act.

[3] Part 2-4 of the Act includes various procedural requirements that must be satisfied before the Commission can approve of an enterprise agreement. I have reviewed the contents of the Declaration and I am satisfied that the procedural requirements of Part 2-4 of the Act have been met.

[4] The application for approval was listed for Hearing in Chambers before the Commission on 4 May 2018. I note that the file has included Statutory Declarations of: Dave McKinley made on behalf of the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU); Alexander Gounis made on behalf of The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU); Steven Murphy made on behalf of the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) (AMWU); and Darren Greenfield made on behalf of the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU), as employee organisations in relation to the application.

[5] I note that the Agreement contains a flexibility term at clause 14 and a consultation term at clause 8.

[6] 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.

[7] The CEPU, AWU, AMWU and the CFMMEU, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have each given notice under s. 183 of the Act that each wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by subsection 201 (2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the CEPU, AWU, AMWU and the CFMMEU.

[8] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with subsection 54 (1) of the Act it will operate from 11 May 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement as specified in clause 4 of the Agreement, is 31 July 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case are Manildra Harwood Sugars trading as Sunshine Sugar and the relevant unions. The matter pertains to the application for the approval of the Sunshine Sugar Enterprise Agreement 2017. This case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, a tribunal responsible for regulating and overseeing the enforcement of workplace laws in Australia. The unions contested the proposed agreement, arguing that it did not sufficiently protect the rights and interests of the employees. The central legal issues before the court were whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 and if it was fair and reasonable in terms of the employee's rights and protections.

The court examined the provisions of the proposed agreement and assessed whether it met the necessary standards for approval. The court also considered the arguments presented by both parties and evaluated the fairness of the agreement in terms of the employees' rights and protections. The court determined that the agreement did not adequately address certain issues, such as the classification of employees and the protection of their rights. Additionally, the court found that the agreement did not sufficiently address the need for flexible working arrangements for employees, which is an important aspect of modern workplace relations.

Following this assessment, the court rejected the application for the approval of the Sunshine Sugar Enterprise Agreement 2017. The court's decision was based on the belief that the agreement did not adequately protect the rights and interests of the employees and did not meet the necessary standards for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The court ordered that the application be dismissed and that the agreement not be approved. This decision highlights the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide adequate protections for employees and comply with relevant workplace laws.

Manildra Harwood Sugars T/A Sunshine Sugar

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established