DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Moxstar Pty Ltd T/A Corfield’s Electrical Service
(AG2017/2957)

CORFIELD’S ELECTRICAL SERVICE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Electrical contracting industry
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS	NEWCASTLE, 17 OCTOBER 2017

Application for approval of the Corfield’s Electrical Service Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Corfield’s Electrical Service Enterprise Agreement 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Moxstar Pty Ltd T/A Corfield’s Electrical Service. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings (the Undertakings). A copy of the Undertakings is attached in Annexure A to this decision. I am satisfied that the effect of accepting the Undertakings is not likely to:

(a) cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement; or

(b) result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] The views of each person who the Fair Work Commission knows is a bargaining representative for the Agreement have been sought in relation to the Undertakings.

[4] Pursuant to subsection 190(3) of the Act, I accept the Undertakings.

[5] Subject to the Undertakings, 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.

[6] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 24 October 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 16 October 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Moxstar Pty Ltd, trading as Corfield’s Electrical Service, and a group of their employees represented by the Electrical Trades Union of Australia. The dispute was over the application for the approval of the Corfield’s Electrical Service Enterprise Agreement 2017, which was lodged with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) by the employer. The FWC was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the FFW was whether the enterprise agreement complied with the procedural and substantive requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the FWC had to assess whether the agreement had been made in accordance with the procedural fairness provisions, which include genuine bargaining, and whether it contained terms that are contrary to the Fair Work Act’s objectives, including the provision of a safety net of minimum terms and conditions of employment. Additionally, the FWC examined whether the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, considering factors such as the benefits provided to the employees and the fairness of the terms.

In determining the approval of the agreement, the FWC considered the evidence provided by both parties and conducted an analysis of the agreement's terms. The FWC found that the agreement had been genuinely bargained and that it did not contain any terms that were contrary to the objectives of the Fair Work Act. The FWC also concluded that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, as it provided for a fair and reasonable set of terms and conditions that met the needs of the enterprise. Consequently, the FWC approved the enterprise agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Corfield’s Electrical Service Enterprise Agreement 2017, finding that it met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. The decision was made on the basis that the agreement was genuinely bargained, did not contain terms contrary to the objectives of the Act, and was in the best interests of the employees.

Moxstar Pty Ltd T/A Corfield’s Electrical Service

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established