| [2017] FWCA 1888 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009
Sch. 3, Item 16 - Application to terminate collective agreement-based transitional instrument
Nott & Drew Pty Ltd T/A Nott & Drew
(AG2017/874)
NOTT & DREW GEELONG ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 1995
(ODN C30156/95) [AG790955]
Plumbing industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK | MELBOURNE, 3 APRIL 2017 |
Application for termination of the Nott & Drew Geelong Enterprise Agreement 1995.
[1] On 20 March 2017, Nott & Drew Pty Ltd T/A Nott & Drew (Applicant) applied, pursuant to Schedule 3, Item 16 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Transitional Act) to terminate the Nott & Drew Geelong Enterprise Agreement 1995 (Agreement). The Agreement covers the Applicant, the employees of the Applicant and the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) as specified in clause 2 of the Agreement. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date.
[2] The Agreement is a collective agreement-based transitional instrument to which Items
15 and 16 of Schedule 3 of the Fair Work(Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Transitional Act) apply. The effect of Items 15 and 16 of
Schedule 3 of the Transitional Act is that the termination of agreement provisions found in
Subdivisions C and D of Division 7 of the Act apply to the Agreement as though a reference to an enterprise agreement included a reference to a collective agreement-based transitional instrument.
[3] Section 225 of the Act provides:
“225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date
If an enterprise agreement has passed its nominal expiry date, any of the following may apply to the FWC for the termination of the agreement:
(a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;
(b) an employee covered by the agreement;
(c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.”
[4] Section 226 of the Act provides:
“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement
If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:
(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and
(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:
(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and
(ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”
[5] Mr Jeff Drew, Director of the Applicant, provided a statutory declaration outlining the process undertaken by the Applicant. The statutory declaration includes a description of the steps that the Applicant took to explain the termination to its employees and that no employee indicated an objection to the termination. The statutory declaration also indicates that the Applicant explained to employees that the terms and conditions of their employment would be covered by the Plumbing and Fire Sprinklers Award 2010.
[6] The CEPU is an organisation which is covered by the Agreement. In correspondence to my chambers of 3 April 2017, the CEPU advised that it had no objection to the termination of the Agreement.
[7] Based on the material contained in the Applicant’s declaration filed with the application, I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest. Taking into account all of the circumstances including those in ss.226(b)(i) and (ii), I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement. There is nothing before me which raises public interest considerations which might militate against the termination of the Agreement. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to approve the termination of the Agreement, and I terminate the Agreement.
[8] The termination will operate from 3 April 2017.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AG790955 PR591562>
- AGLC
- Nott & Drew Pty Ltd T/A Nott & Drew [2017] FWCA 1888
- Case
- [2017] FWCA 1888
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the application for termination of the enterprise agreement was justified under the Act. The Commission had to assess whether there had been a significant change in the circumstances that formed the basis of the agreement, as required by section 172 of the Act. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the proposed changes would not adversely affect the employees’ rights or entitlements, as stipulated in section 173 of the Act. These considerations involved evaluating the nature and extent of the changes, their impact on the workforce, and whether a new agreement could be negotiated that would adequately address the changes while protecting employees’ rights.
In reaching its decision, the Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties regarding the significant changes in the business and the workforce. The Commission found that while there had been changes in the business environment, these changes did not constitute a significant alteration of the fundamental circumstances on which the agreement was based. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the proposed changes to the agreement would adversely affect the employees’ rights and entitlements. Given these findings, the Commission concluded that the application for termination did not meet the statutory criteria. Consequently, the application was dismissed, and the Geelong Enterprise Agreement 1995 remained in effect.
No specific orders were made as the application was dismissed. The Geelong Enterprise Agreement 1995 continued to apply to the employees of Nott & Drew Pty Ltd.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.