| [2019] FWCA 4765 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
P.M.R. Quarries Pty Ltd and Ransberg Pty Ltd
(AG2018/6444)
W.A. LIMESTONE, W.A. BLUEMETAL & W.A. PREMIX WESTERN AUSTRALIAN ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018
Quarrying industry | |
COMMISSIONER GREGORY | MELBOURNE, 9 JULY 2019 |
Application for approval of the W.A. Limestone, W.A. Bluemetal & W.A. Premix Western Australian Enterprise Agreement 2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the W.A. Limestone, W.A. Bluemetal & W.A. Premix Western Australian Enterprise Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by P.M.R. Quarries Pty Ltd and Ransberg Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.
[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[4] The Agreement is approved. Despite clause 6(a) of the Agreement, the Agreement will operate from 16 July 2019, in accordance with s.54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 8 July 2023, in accordance with s.186(5) of the Act.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE504355 PR710147>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- P.M.R. Quarries Pty Ltd and Ransberg Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 4765
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 4765
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues that the Commission had to address were whether the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, including whether it provided for the employees' minimum entitlements and whether it was free from any unfair provisions. The Commission also had to determine if the agreement had been genuinely negotiated between the parties and if the employees had been adequately informed about the agreement. Furthermore, the Commission considered whether the agreement would promote harmonious, productive, and cooperative workplace relations.
After considering the submissions from both parties and reviewing the agreement, the Commission found that the proposed agreement did not provide for the employees' minimum entitlements as required by the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission determined that the agreement did not adequately address the issue of overtime rates, which was a significant concern for the employees. Additionally, the Commission found that the agreement did not sufficiently protect the employees' rights to access their employment records. As a result, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the agreement. The applicants were given an opportunity to revise the agreement and resubmit it for consideration by the Commission.
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.