Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 3706

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd
(AG2014/5852)

MARAIS LAYING TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD AND ETU ENTERPRISE (GREENSFIELD) AGREEMENT 2010-2014

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 5 JUNE 2014

Application for approval of the Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd and ETU Enterprise (Greensfield) Agreement 2010-2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd and ETU Enterprise (Greensfield) Agreement 2010-2014 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

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

[3] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] I am satisfied that the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, the employee organisation to be covered by the agreement, is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 5 June 2014 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 12 June 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2014.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd sought approval of the Marais Laying Technologies Pty Ltd and ETU Enterprise (Greensfield) Agreement 2010-2014. The applicant, a small business, argued that the agreement was appropriate for its unique circumstances. The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union opposed the application, contending that the agreement did not sufficiently protect employee rights.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided adequate safeguards for employee entitlements, such as minimum wages and conditions, and whether it complied with relevant legislative provisions. The Commission needed to determine whether the agreement was fair and reasonable, taking into account the specific context of the parties involved.

The Commission found that the agreement adequately protected employee entitlements and was fair and reasonable in the circumstances. It noted that the applicant had a small workforce and was subject to fluctuating demand, which influenced the terms of the agreement. The Commission concluded that the agreement was appropriate for the applicant's unique business context and approved it. The Commission's decision was based on a careful consideration of the parties' submissions and the specific circumstances of the applicant's business.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established