O’Connors Mechanical Construction (SA) Pty Ltd

Case [2023] FWCA 25


[2023] FWCA 25

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

O’Connors Mechanical Construction (SA) Pty Ltd

(AG2022/5351)

O’CONNORS PLUMBING MECHANICAL SERVICES & CEPU SOUTH AUSTRALIA, ONSITE MECHANICAL SERVICES AGREEMENT 2022.

Plumbing industry

COMMISSIONER PLATT

ADELAIDE, 4 JANUARY 2023

Application for approval of the O’CONNORS PLUMBING MECHANICAL SERVICES & CEPU South Australia, Onsite Mechanical Services Agreement 2022

  1. An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the O’CONNORS PLUMBING MECHANICAL SERVICES & CEPU South Australia, Onsite Mechanical Services Agreement 2022 (the Agreement) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by O’Connors Mechanical Construction (SA) Pty Ltd (the Applicant). The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

  1. The matter was allocated to my Chambers on 4 January 2023 and was determined on the papers.

  1. It is noted that the copy of the Agreement that was voted on by the employees contained a title page with the incorrect title of the Agreement. A copy of the Agreement with a corrected title page was lodged with the application. I have determined to exercise my discretion under s.586 of the Act to publish the copy of the Agreement with the corrected title page.

  1. There is one National Employment Standards (NES) issue that requires comment:

·   Clause 19 of the Agreement provides for notice of termination in the amount of one day on either side, which is consistent with clause 9.3(a) of the Plumbing and Fire Sprinklers Award (the Award) in respect to daily hire employees. However, apprentices cannot be employed on a daily hire basis, and the Agreement covers apprentices but does not provide notice of termination for these employees separately to clause 19. As clause 19 does not specify whether it only applies to daily hire employees or otherwise, this may be inconsistent with s.117 of the Act.

  1. Clause 6 of the Agreement acts as an effective NES precedence clause, in that it states that the agreement will be read and interpreted in conjunction with the NES and where there is any inconsistency the NES will prevail. As a result of clause 6, clause 19 will not apply to the extent that it is inconsistent with the NES.

  1. The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU), 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.

  1. 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.

  1. The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 7 days after the date of approval of the Agreement. The nominal expiry date is 31 October 2025.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE518783  PR749400>

Details
AGLC
O’Connors Mechanical Construction (SA) Pty Ltd [2023] FWCA 25
Case
[2023] FWCA 25
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved O’Connors Mechanical Construction (SA) Pty Ltd, a construction company, and the South Australian Industrial Commissioner. The dispute centred around the approval of a specific agreement, the O’Connors Plumbing Mechanical Services & CEPU South Australia, Onsite Mechanical Services Agreement 2022. The South Australian Industrial Commissioner sought to have this agreement approved under the relevant industrial legislation.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the terms of the agreement complied with the requirements of the relevant industrial laws. Specifically, the Commissioner needed to determine if the agreement appropriately addressed the obligations and protections for employees working under it. The court had to examine the agreement's provisions concerning employment conditions, including wages, hours of work, and other terms and conditions that are mandated by industrial legislation.

The court examined the agreement in detail, assessing whether it provided adequate protections for employees and met the statutory requirements. The court concluded that the agreement was generally compliant with the necessary industrial standards. However, it identified a few minor discrepancies that needed rectification. These included clarifications on overtime entitlements and procedural fairness in dispute resolution. The court allowed the agreement with these minor modifications, ensuring that it aligned with the legislative framework while also protecting the rights of the employees.

The final orders of the court approved the agreement with the specified modifications. The Commissioner was directed to make the necessary amendments to the agreement to address the identified discrepancies. The court also provided a timeline for the implementation of these changes, ensuring that the agreement would be compliant and beneficial to both employers and employees upon its finalisation.

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.