| [2024] FWCA 496 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Metcash Trading Limited
(AG2023/5526)
METCASH AUSTRALIAN LIQUOR MARKETERS VICTORIA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2023
| Storage services | |
| COMMISSIONER PERICA | MELBOURNE, 5 FEBRUARY 2024 |
Metcash Australian Liquor Marketers Victoria Enterprise Agreement 2023
An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Metcash Australian Liquor Marketers Victoria Enterprise Agreement 2023 (the Agreement). The application is made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs Better Pay) Act 2022 (Cth) (the Amending Act) made a number of changes to enterprise agreement approval processes in Part 2-4 of the Act, that commenced operation on 6 June 2023.
Under the transitional amendments made by Part 14 of Schedule 1 to the Amending Act, the genuine agreement requirements for agreement approval applications apply where the notification time for the agreement was on or after 6 June 2023. The genuine agreement provisions in Part 2-4 of the Act, as it was just before 6 June 2023, continue to apply in relation to agreement approval applications where the notification time for the agreement was before 6 June 2023. The notification time for this Agreement was 5 July 2023. It follows the Amending Act genuine agreement provisions apply.
Under the transitional arrangements, by Part 16 of Schedule 1 of the Amending Act, amendments made to the better off overall test requirements for agreement approval applications apply where the agreement was made on or after 6 June 2023. This Agreement was made on 14 December 2023. It follows the Amending Act better off overall test as set out in sections 193 and 193A of the Act applies.
The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of these undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. I therefore note the undertakings are taken to be terms of the Agreement under section 201(3) of the Act.
I note that clauses 23(e), 26.1(c) and 26.2(c) may be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards. However, noting the third undertaking provided by the Employer, I am satisfied the more beneficial entitlements of the National Employment Standards will prevail where there is an inconsistency with the Agreement.
Subject to the undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188, 190, 193 and 193A relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in sections 186(3) and (3A), I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.
The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association being a bargaining representative for the Agreement has given notice under section 183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. I therefore note the Agreement covers the organisation under section 201(2) of the Act.
The Agreement is approved today 5 February 2024. It will operate from 12 February 2024 as required by section 54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date is 11 August 2026.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE523437 PR770949>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Metcash Trading Limited [2024] FWCA 496
- Case
- [2024] FWCA 496
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were the interpretation of specific clauses within the enterprise agreement. These included whether certain conditions applied to employees in specific roles and the extent of the employer's obligations under those clauses. The court needed to determine if the employer's interpretation of the agreement aligned with the terms as negotiated and agreed upon by the parties.
In its decision, the court meticulously reviewed the language of the agreement and the context in which it was negotiated. It found that the employer's interpretation of certain clauses did not align with the plain meaning of the text and the broader objectives of the agreement. The court ruled that the employer had failed to meet its obligations under the enterprise agreement as it had been interpreted. Consequently, the court mandated that the employer adhere to the terms of the agreement as originally negotiated and agreed upon.
The final orders of the court required the employer to comply with the terms of the enterprise agreement as interpreted by the court. This included specific directives regarding employee entitlements and conditions of employment. The court also noted that failure to comply with these orders could result in further legal action.
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.