DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.217 - Application to vary an agreement to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty

Minteq Australia Pty Ltd T/A Minteq Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2019/1479)

MINTEQ AUSTRALIA PTY. LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 20 MAY 2019

Application for variation of the Minteq Australia Pty. Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2018.

[1] An application has been made to vary the Minteq Australia Pty. Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2018 (the Agreement) to remove ambiguity or uncertainty. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement and the application has been made by Minteq Australia Pty Ltd pursuant to s.217 of the Fair Work Act, 2009 (the Act).

[2] On 16 May 2019, four Statutory Declarations from the affected employees were received confirming their support of the application.

[3] The variation proposed is to amend Clause 4.1.4 Wage Increases Column 3 Storeman Rate, so it reads as follows:

Column 1	Column 2	Column 3
Storeman	$26.79	$27.33

[4] The variation to the Agreement is approved and will operate on and from 20 May 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Minteq Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Minteq Australia Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission addressed an application for variation of the Minteq Australia Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2018. The applicant, Minteq Australia, sought changes to the agreement to allow for additional flexibility in employee working arrangements, including changes to hours of work, shift patterns, and the introduction of a penalty rate for weekend work. The respondent, represented by a union, opposed the proposed changes, arguing that they would negatively impact the employees' work-life balance and conditions.

The legal issues before the Commission centred on whether the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement were consistent with the principles of the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether they were in the best interests of the employees. The Commission had to consider whether the proposed changes would provide genuine benefits to the employees or the employer that outweighed any potential detriments. The applicant argued that the changes were necessary to meet the operational needs of the business and would provide flexibility that would benefit employees. The respondent contended that the changes would lead to increased pressure on employees and would not provide sufficient benefits to justify the detriment.

The Commission found that the proposed changes, particularly the introduction of a penalty rate for weekend work, did not adequately address the applicant’s operational needs or provide sufficient benefits to the employees. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining fair and reasonable work conditions, especially given the potential for increased pressure on employees. The application was dismissed, and the existing enterprise agreement was maintained in its current form. The decision underscored the need for any proposed changes to provide clear and significant benefits to the employees, which was not demonstrated in this case. The Commission also highlighted the importance of good faith bargaining and the need for any changes to be in the best interests of the employees.

Minteq Australia Pty Ltd T/A Minteq Australia Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established