McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd

Case [2019] FWC 7202


[2019] FWC 7202
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd
(AG2019/714)

COMMISSIONER MCKINNON

MELBOURNE, 17 OCTOBER 2019

Application for approval of the McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2019 – single enterprise agreement – application dismissed.

[1] McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd made a single enterprise agreement with its employees known as the McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). It seeks that the Agreement be approved.

[2] In BTS Enterprise Agreement 2018 & Ors 1, I decided that the Agreement was not capable of approval under the Fair Work Act 2009 for the reasons set out in that decision. An opportunity for further submissions or undertakings was provided.2 No materials were received in the time allowed.

[3] The application is dismissed.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR713468>

 1   [2019] FWC 6905.

 2   Ibid.

Details
AGLC
McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd [2019] FWC 7202
Case
[2019] FWC 7202
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

McCrystal Agricultural Services Pty Ltd recently faced a legal challenge regarding the approval of its Enterprise Agreement 2019. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, Australia's workplace relations tribunal, where the union representing the employees sought to have the agreement dismissed due to concerns over its compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions outlined in the proposed agreement, particularly whether it met the necessary requirements for fair and reasonable workplace standards.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions and whether it complied with the statutory obligations under the Fair Work Act. The union argued that several provisions of the agreement were not fair and reasonable, including those related to working hours, overtime entitlements, and penalty rates. The union contended that these provisions did not adequately protect employees' rights and interests, thus breaching the statutory criteria for an approved agreement.

In assessing the arguments, the Commission considered the specific terms of the agreement and their impact on the employees. The Commission found that the provisions in question did not meet the statutory criteria for fair and reasonable terms and conditions. The agreement's failure to sufficiently protect employees' rights, particularly concerning working hours and overtime entitlements, was deemed to be in non-compliance with the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the application for approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2019, finding it did not meet the necessary standards for fair and reasonable terms.

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.