DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2017/1351)

MONDELEZ AUSTRALIA SUTTONTOWN MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2016

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 8 MAY 2017

Application for approval of the Mondelez Australia Suttontown Maintenance Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Mondelez Australia Suttontown Maintenance Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Mondelez 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. 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 “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) and the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 8 May 2017 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 15 May 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, the matter of Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd concerned an application for approval of the Mondelez Australia Suttontown Maintenance Agreement 2016. The applicant sought approval of the agreement, which detailed the terms and conditions under which the maintenance of a manufacturing facility would be undertaken. The dispute involved whether the agreement met the necessary requirements under relevant industrial laws to ensure fair and equitable treatment of the employees involved in the maintenance work.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the agreement was appropriately negotiated, whether it provided for fair terms and conditions, and whether it complied with the procedural requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The court had to assess the nature of the bargaining process, the content of the agreement, and whether it provided adequate protection for the employees' rights and interests.

The court examined the evidence presented regarding the negotiation process and the terms of the agreement. It considered whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated between the parties and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms. The court also reviewed the procedural aspects to ensure that the agreement was properly submitted for approval. Ultimately, the court found that the agreement met the necessary requirements, was fairly negotiated, and provided adequate protection for the employees. Consequently, the court approved the Mondelez Australia Suttontown Maintenance Agreement 2016.

The final orders included the approval of the agreement, which allows for the maintenance work to proceed under the terms set out in the agreement. The court's decision ensures that the rights and interests of the employees are protected while allowing the maintenance work to be carried out efficiently.

Mondelez 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