DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

National Union of Workers
(AG2017/1953)

BURSON AUTO PARTS (HEMMANT) AGREEMENT 2017

Vehicle industry
COMMISSIONER MCKINNON	MELBOURNE, 6 JULY 2017

Application for approval of the Burson Auto Parts (Hemmant) Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Burson Auto Parts (Hemmant) 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 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 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) 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 13 July 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 5 July 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an application by the National Union of Workers to approve the Burson Auto Parts (Hemmant) Agreement 2017. The agreement was made between Burson Auto Parts and the union in relation to the employment terms and conditions of certain workers. The application was brought under the Fair Work Act 2009, which provides a framework for the regulation of workplace relations in Australia.

The legal issues before the court were whether the agreement was a protected action ballot agreement, whether the agreement was in the public interest, and whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Act. The court had to consider the provisions of the Act, as well as relevant case law and any other relevant factors.

The court found that the agreement was a protected action ballot agreement and that it was in the public interest. The court also found that the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Act. The court noted that the agreement provided for a fair and equitable resolution of the industrial dispute, and that it was in the best interests of the workers and the employer. The court approved the agreement, and the union was granted the relief it sought.

The court's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the agreement and the relevant legal provisions. The court found that the agreement was a valid and binding agreement between the parties, and that it met the requirements for approval under the Act. The court also noted that the agreement provided for a fair and equitable resolution of the industrial dispute, and that it was in the best interests of all parties involved.

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