Origin Energy Limited

[2013] FWCA 9344

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Origin Energy Limited
(AG2013/11107)

ORIGIN ENERGY (OTWAY OPERATIONS) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Oil and gas industry
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 28 NOVEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Origin Energy (Otway Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] On 29 October 2013 an application was made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Origin Energy (Otway Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2013 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) by Origin Energy Limited (Applicant). The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was lodged within 14 days after it was made.

[3] The Commission is 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.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union, 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), the Commission notes that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 5 December 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 August 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Origin Energy Limited applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Origin Energy (Otway Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was contested by the United Voice union. The dispute centred around whether the agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009 and the Fair Work Regulations 2009, particularly concerning the terms and conditions of employment for employees at the Otway operations. The union argued that the agreement failed to provide adequate protections and entitlements for employees.

The court had to determine if the enterprise agreement was a genuine enterprise agreement, if it contained all the required minimum terms and conditions, and if it was free from prohibited content. The key issue was whether certain provisions in the agreement, which the union claimed were unfair and did not meet the statutory minimum standards, were compliant with the legislative framework. The union argued that the agreement's provisions on pay rates, leave entitlements, and dispute resolution mechanisms were deficient and did not offer sufficient protections for the workforce.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission examined the provisions of the agreement in detail, comparing them against the Fair Work Act and the Fair Work Regulations. The Commission found that while some aspects of the agreement required minor amendments to ensure compliance, the overall agreement was genuine and did not contain prohibited content. The Commission approved the agreement with conditions that certain specified clauses be modified to align with the legislative requirements. The union's concerns regarding the provisions were addressed, and the agreement was ultimately found to meet the necessary standards for approval.

The Commission ordered that the enterprise agreement be approved with the specified modifications to the clauses. These modifications were intended to rectify the deficiencies identified during the review process and ensure that the agreement provided adequate protections and entitlements for the employees. The union's right to appeal the decision was preserved, but the agreement was allowed to proceed with the conditions imposed by the Commission.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established