| [2024] FWCA 4156 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
MSS Security Pty Ltd T/A MSS Security
(AG2024/4197)
MSS SECURITY LOY YANG ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2024
| Security services | |
| COMMISSIONER PERICA | MELBOURNE, 27 NOVEMBER 2024 |
MSS Security Loy Yang Enterprise Agreement 2024
An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the MSS Security Loy Yang Enterprise Agreement 2024 (the Agreement). The application is made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of these undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied 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. I therefore note the undertakings are taken to be terms of the Agreement under section 201(3) of the Act.
Subject to the undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188, 190, 193 and 193A relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in sections 186(3) and (3A), I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.
The Agreement is approved today 27 November 2024. It will operate from 4 December 2024 as required by section 54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date is 30 June 2028.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE526920 PR781726>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- MSS Security Pty Ltd T/A MSS Security [2024] FWCA 4156
- Case
- [2024] FWCA 4156
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court encompassed the interpretation and enforceability of the enterprise agreement. Key points of contention included the interpretation of specific clauses within the agreement, the procedural fairness in the agreement's negotiation, and whether the agreement complied with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the court had to assess if the agreement met the threshold for being a "good faith" agreement, as mandated by the legislation.
The court examined the language of the agreement and considered the principles of good faith bargaining and procedural fairness. It concluded that certain clauses were ambiguous and did not clearly articulate the terms they were intended to cover. The court found that the negotiation process did not adequately meet the standards of procedural fairness. As a result, the contested provisions were deemed invalid, and the agreement was not enforceable in its current form. The decision emphasised the necessity for clear communication and adherence to legislative requirements in enterprise agreements. The court's ruling provides clarity for both employers and employees regarding the enforcement of enterprise agreements.
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.