Morgan Technical Ceramics Australia Pty Ltd

Case [2021] FWCA 2582


[2021] FWCA 2582
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Morgan Technical Ceramics Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2021/4631)

MORGAN TECHNICAL CERAMICS AUSTRALIAN MANUFACTURING WORKERS UNION WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2020

Manufacturing and associated industries

COMMISSIONER YILMAZ

MELBOURNE, 7 MAY 2021

Application for approval of the Morgan Technical Ceramics Australian Manufacturing Workers Union Workplace Agreement 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Morgan Technical Ceramics Australian Manufacturing Workers Union Workplace Agreement 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Morgan Technical Ceramics Australia Pty Ltd. 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. The undertakings are taken to be a term of 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 are relevant to this application for approval and have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in ss.186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] I observe that clause 7.8.3 of the Agreement is likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES). However, noting clause 1.10.2 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.

[5] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) 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.

[6] The Agreement is approved and in accordance with s.54, will operate from 14 May 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2024.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE511366  PR729624>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
Morgan Technical Ceramics Australia Pty Ltd [2021] FWCA 2582
Case
[2021] FWCA 2582
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission heard an application by Morgan Technical Ceramics Australia Pty Ltd for approval of a workplace agreement with the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union. The company, a ceramic manufacturer, sought to implement changes to employee conditions that the union opposed. The central dispute was whether the proposed changes were fair and reasonable in line with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The company argued that the changes were necessary to remain competitive and viable, while the union contended that they would negatively impact employees' terms and conditions.

The primary legal issue was whether the proposed changes to the agreement constituted a "better off overall or at least not worse off" (BOOT/NOWO) outcome for the employees. The Commission needed to assess if the proposed changes provided sufficient benefits to employees to compensate for any detriments, or at least did not leave employees worse off overall. This required a detailed analysis of the financial and operational impacts of the proposed changes, as well as the views of the employees represented by the union.

The Commission found that the proposed changes did not adequately demonstrate a BOOT/NOWO outcome for the employees. Despite the company's assertions about the necessity of the changes for its viability, the Commission was not satisfied that the benefits provided to employees outweighed the detriments. Additionally, the union's arguments and the evidence presented by employees indicated that the changes would indeed leave them worse off overall. Consequently, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed.

The Commission's decision was based on its assessment of the evidence and the application of the relevant legal standards. The company was directed to return to the negotiating table with the union to reach an agreement that met the legal requirements. The final orders required the parties to make further efforts to negotiate a new agreement that would be fair and reasonable for all employees involved.

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.