DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Mitre10 Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2016/1715)

MITRE 10 AUSTRALIA LIMITED ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT (QUEENSLAND) 2016

Storage services
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 23 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the Mitre 10 Australia Limited Enterprise Agreement (Queensland) 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Mitre 10 Australia Limited Enterprise Agreement (Queensland) 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Mitre10 Australia Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that 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.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The National Union of Workers being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 30 August 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mitre10 Australia Pty Ltd sought approval for the Mitre 10 Australia Limited Enterprise Agreement (Queensland) 2016. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, which was required to determine whether the agreement met the necessary criteria under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred around whether the agreement provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees, including provisions related to pay rates, conditions, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while no objections were raised by any party, including the employees' representatives.

The legal issues the court needed to address included whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act, particularly whether it provided for the employees' minimum entitlements, and whether it was free from any unfair content. The court also considered whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether it met the standards of procedural fairness. Given that no objections were raised, the court had to rely on the contents of the agreement and the submissions made by the applicant.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the agreement met the necessary legal standards. The court was satisfied that the agreement provided for minimum entitlements and was free from unfair content. The procedural fairness of the negotiation process was also upheld, as there were no objections to the manner in which the agreement was reached. The court approved the agreement, noting the absence of any adverse submissions or evidence that would warrant a different outcome.

The final orders included the approval of the Mitre 10 Australia Limited Enterprise Agreement (Queensland) 2016, which was to be registered and enforceable under the Fair Work Act. The decision was made in light of the absence of any objections and the compliance of the agreement with the statutory requirements.

Mitre10 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