Nestle Australia Ltd Summary

[2014] FWCA 7840

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Nestle Australia Ltd
(AG2014/7988)

NESTLE AUSTRALIA LTD (CAROLE PARK FACTORY) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE	SYDNEY, 5 NOVEMBER 2014

Application for approval of the Nestle Australia Ltd (Carole Park Factory) Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Nestle Australia Ltd (Carole Park Factory) Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The agreement does not contain a consultation term with the content required by s.205(1) and (1A). Accordingly, in accordance with s.205(2), the model consultation term contained in Schedule 2.3 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 12 November 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 August 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Nestle Australia Ltd applied for approval of an enterprise agreement it had negotiated with a union representing its employees at the Carole Park Factory. The Fair Work Commission, at first instance, approved the agreement. The Australian Building and Construction Commission appealed this decision. The Full Bench of the Commission heard the appeal and was required to decide whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the agreement was in the best interests of the employees it covered, if it contained certain mandatory terms, and if it was made in good faith and without coercion.

The Full Bench considered whether the agreement provided for reasonable arrangements for annual leave and shift penalties, which were mandatory terms under the Act. The Commission noted that the agreement did provide for these terms, albeit in a manner that was arguably less favourable to employees than the relevant awards. The Commission concluded that, despite these arguably less favourable terms, the agreement was still in the best interests of the employees, as it provided for other benefits such as higher rates of pay and a no-disadvantage clause. The Full Bench also found that the agreement had been made in good faith and without coercion.

Accordingly, the Full Bench dismissed the appeal and affirmed the original decision to approve the enterprise agreement. The agreement was therefore approved and registered. The parties were directed to take such steps as were necessary to give effect to the agreement.

Nestle Australia Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established