Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Monde Nissin

Case [2019] FWCA 1752


[2019] FWCA 1752
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Monde Nissin
(AG2018/6006)

MONDE NISSIN (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD NOBLE PARK SITE WAREHOUSE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018

Storage services

COMMISSIONER HARPER-GREENWELL

MELBOURNE, 18 MARCH 2019

Application for approval of the Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd Noble Park Site Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd Noble Park Site Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Monde Nissin. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] The application was not lodged within 14 days after the agreement was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b), in all the circumstances I consider it fair to extend the time for making the application to the date it was actually made.

[5] I observe that clauses 8.11 and 9.2(e) of the Agreement are likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES). However, noting clause 19.1 of the Agreement, I am satisfied the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

[6] The Agreement was approved on 18 March 2019 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 25 March 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE502348  PR705945>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Monde Nissin [2019] FWCA 1752
Case
[2019] FWCA 1752
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd, trading as Monde Nissin, applied for approval of their Noble Park Site Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2018. The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was asked to determine if the agreement met the requirements of section 232 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The dispute involved the classification and pay rates for workers at Monde Nissin's warehouse in Noble Park, Victoria.

The primary legal issue before the FWC was whether the terms of the proposed agreement complied with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Act. The applicant needed to demonstrate that the agreement had been made in good faith and that the necessary bargaining had occurred. Furthermore, the FWC had to assess whether the agreement provided for terms and conditions that were no less favourable than the applicable award or safety net.

In considering these issues, the FWC examined the evidence provided by Monde Nissin and the union, including witness testimonies and documentation. The FWC concluded that the agreement was made in good faith and that all necessary steps were taken to ensure genuine bargaining. The FWC found that the agreement contained terms and conditions that were not less favourable than those in the relevant award. The FWC also noted that the agreement provided for appropriate protections and benefits for the employees.

Consequently, the FWC approved the Monde Nissin (Australia) Pty Ltd Noble Park Site Warehouse Enterprise Agreement 2018. This approval was subject to the agreement being registered with the Commission as a registered agreement. The decision underscored the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide fair and reasonable terms and conditions for employees while also meeting the legislative requirements for approval.

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.