DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

National Union of Workers
(AG2015/1278)

NERADA TEA PTY LTD - NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015 - 2018

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC	CANBERRA, 8 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Nerada Tea Pty Ltd - National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2015 - 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Nerada Tea Pty Ltd - National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2015 - 2018 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by the National Union of Workers. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The National Union of Workers, 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 14 July 2018.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, the National Union of Workers, applied for the approval of the Nerada Tea Pty Ltd - National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2015 - 2018, under section 194 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was heard by the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission, presided over by Commissioner McCabe, Deputy President Mortimer, and Registrar O’Brien. The respondent, Nerada Tea Pty Ltd, opposed the application on the basis that the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the provisions of the Fair Work Act.

The primary issue before the court was whether the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the Fair Work Act. The court considered whether the provisions in the agreement were fair and reasonable, and whether they complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act. The court also considered whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated between the parties and whether it contained the necessary procedural fairness provisions.

The court found that the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the court found that the agreement contained provisions that were not genuinely negotiated, and that it did not contain the necessary procedural fairness provisions. The court also found that some of the provisions in the agreement were not fair and reasonable. The court concluded that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act, and therefore could not be approved. The court rejected the application for approval of the agreement.

The court did not make any orders as the application was rejected. The agreement was not approved, and therefore did not come into effect. The parties were directed to negotiate a new enterprise agreement that complied with the Fair Work Act.

National Union of Workers

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established