Matt Molloy T/A Integral Scaffolding Summary

[2013] FWCA 7045

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Matt Molloy T/A Integral Scaffolding
(AG2013/8702)

MATT MOLLOY TRADING AS INTEGRAL SCAFFOLDING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER MACDONALD	SYDNEY, 18 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Matt Molloy trading as Integral Scaffolding Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Matt Molloy trading as Integral Scaffolding Enterprise Agreement 2013 (“the Agreement”). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”). The application has been made by Matt Molloy Pty Ltd (“the applicant”). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 relevant to this application for approval has been met.

[3] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date is 25 September 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Matt Molloy, trading as Integral Scaffolding, applied for approval of the 2013 Enterprise Agreement. The application arose from a dispute with a former employee, Mr. Peter Whiteley, who argued that the agreement did not comply with the Fair Work Act 2009. The primary issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement complied with the statutory requirements and if the process for its approval was valid.

The legal issues centred around the validity of the agreement's provisions and the process through which it was negotiated and approved. The Commission had to examine if the agreement contained all the required minimum terms and conditions, if it was negotiated in good faith, and if the appropriate process for approval was followed. The former employee also raised concerns about the agreement's adherence to the provisions of the Fair Work Act, particularly regarding procedural fairness.

After reviewing the evidence and submissions, the Commission found that the enterprise agreement complied with the statutory requirements and was negotiated in good faith. The Commission determined that the process for approval was valid, and no procedural unfairness was evident. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, dismissing the application by Mr. Whiteley. The decision was based on the comprehensive compliance of the agreement with the Fair Work Act and the evidence supporting the integrity of the negotiation process. The Commission's decision effectively resolved the dispute, affirming the agreement's validity and its procedural fairness.

Matt Molloy T/A Integral Scaffolding

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established