Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 1278

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/12022)

NILSEN (WA) PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2017

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 20 FEBRUARY 2014

Application for approval of the Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd. 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 Agreement was approved on 20 February 2014 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 February 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 February 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd and its employees, represented by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The dispute centred on the approval of the Nilsen (WA) Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017. The applicant sought to have the agreement registered, while the union contested certain aspects of the agreement, arguing that it did not meet the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the Enterprise Agreement complied with the procedural requirements for its registration and whether it contained provisions that contravened the provisions of the Fair Work Act. The union argued that the agreement did not adequately cover all employees, that certain provisions were inconsistent with the Act, and that the process for reaching the agreement was flawed.

In its decision, the Commission considered the arguments presented by both parties. The Commission found that while the agreement did indeed cover all employees, there were procedural irregularities in the process that led to its creation. Despite these irregularities, the Commission determined that the good faith efforts of the parties and the absence of significant detriment to the employees outweighed the procedural issues. Furthermore, the Commission found that while some provisions were contentious, they did not contravene the Act to a degree that would warrant refusal of registration. Therefore, the Commission approved the agreement, subject to certain modifications to address the union's concerns.

The Commission ordered that the Enterprise Agreement be registered with the modifications noted, and that the parties undertake further consultation to ensure compliance with the Act in future negotiations.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established