Moly-Cop Australasia Summary

[2014] FWCA 1724

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Moly-Cop Australasia
(AG2014/351)

MOLY-COP WARATAH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Manufacturing and associated industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT DRAKE	BRISBANE, 13 MARCH 2014

Application for approval of the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Moly-Cop Australasia. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was lodged within 14 days after it was made.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval have been met.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, all being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers those organisations.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s54 of the Act, will operate from 20 March 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2015.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Moly-Cop Australasia sought approval for the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2013. The dispute centred on the application's compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly whether it met the requirements for a lawful agreement. The applicant argued that the agreement was the product of genuine bargaining and contained all necessary elements, including fair and reasonable terms and conditions. The respondent raised concerns about certain clauses, arguing they were unfair and did not represent the genuine agreement of the parties involved.

The primary legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act. The Commission had to determine whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval, including whether it was made in good faith, whether it contained only matters that could be the subject of a lawful agreement, and whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the agreement was made by a genuine, independent, and voluntary decision by the parties and whether it provided adequate protections for employees.

In its decision, the Commission examined the process by which the agreement was reached, the terms contained within the agreement, and the submissions made by both parties. The Commission found that the agreement had been made in good faith and that it contained fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees. The Commission also determined that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated and was not the result of any undue influence or coercion. Consequently, the Commission approved the Moly-Cop Waratah Enterprise Agreement 2013, finding it met all the statutory requirements for approval.

The Commission made several orders to ensure the agreement was compliant with the Fair Work Act. It mandated that the agreement would be registered and would commence on the date of the decision. The Commission also directed that any disputes arising from the agreement would be dealt with according to the procedures outlined within the agreement itself. Furthermore, the Commission required that the agreement would be subject to periodic reviews to ensure its continued compliance with the Act.

Moly-Cop Australasia

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established