DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

National Union of Workers
(AG2015/534)

BATA & NATIONAL UNION OF WORKERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2017

Storage services
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 19 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the Bata & National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Bata & National Union of Workers Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the National Union of Workers (the Applicant). 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. 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.

[3] The National Union of Workers has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with Section 201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 26 March 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application for the approval of an enterprise agreement between the National Union of Workers and Bata Australia. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment outlined in the proposed agreement for the period of 2014 to 2017. The Fair Work Commission, Australia's workplace relations tribunal, was the court that heard the application. The Commission's task was to determine whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed enterprise agreement was in the best interests of the employees it covered. This involved assessing whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and if it met the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission had to consider various factors, including the nature of the agreement, the bargaining power of the parties, and the potential impact of the agreement on the employees and the employer.

In its decision, the Commission found that the proposed enterprise agreement did not adequately address the issue of shift allowances, which was a significant point of contention. The Commission considered that the agreement failed to provide for fair and reasonable terms regarding shift allowances, which was a critical component of the employment conditions for the workers. Consequently, the Commission did not approve the agreement. The Commission highlighted that the failure to adequately address the shift allowance issue meant the agreement did not meet the necessary standards for approval under the Fair Work Act.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed enterprise agreement not be approved. The Commission's decision emphasised the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, particularly in relation to critical issues such as shift allowances. The decision underscored the need for any proposed enterprise agreement to meet the statutory criteria for approval, and that failure to do so would result in the agreement not being endorsed by the Commission.

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