Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited

Case [2015] FWCA 122


[2015] FWCA 122
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited
(AG2014/10482)

MERITOR HEAVY VEHICLE SYSTEMS (SUNSHINE) AGREEMENT 2014

Vehicle industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY

MELBOURNE, 8 JANUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems (Sunshine) Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems (Sunshine) Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union and the National Union of Workers, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2), I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 8 January 2015 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 15 January 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE412098  PR559775>

Details
AGLC
Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited [2015] FWCA 122
Case
[2015] FWCA 122
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems (Sunshine) Agreement 2014. The application was brought under the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows for the registration of agreements that provide for terms and conditions of employment better than those provided by the relevant industrial instrument. The dispute arose as the respondent union, the Automotive, Food, Beverages, Tobacco and General Workers Union of Australia, objected to the application on the basis that the agreement failed to meet the "better off overall test" as it did not provide for terms and conditions of employment that were at least as good as those provided by the applicable award or agreement.

The legal issues the court had to address were whether the agreement provided terms and conditions of employment that were at least as good as those provided by the applicable industrial instrument, and whether the agreement met the "better off overall test". The court considered the terms and conditions of the agreement, including wages, penalty rates, allowances, and other benefits, and compared them to the terms and conditions of the applicable industrial instrument. The court also considered the impact of the agreement on the employees, including any potential benefits or detriments.

After reviewing the evidence presented by both parties, the court found that the agreement did provide terms and conditions of employment that were at least as good as those provided by the applicable industrial instrument, and that the agreement met the "better off overall test". The court noted that the agreement provided for improved wages, penalty rates, and other benefits for employees, and that these improvements outweighed any potential detriments. The court therefore approved the agreement, and it was registered with the Fair Work Commission.

The final orders of the court were that the Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems (Sunshine) Agreement 2014 be approved and registered under the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement was to be in effect for a period of four years, and could only be varied or terminated in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The union's objection to the application was dismissed.

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.