DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Pacific Industrial Company (WA) Pty Ltd T/A Pacific Industrial Company
(AG2015/7512)

PACIFIC INDUSTRIAL COMPANY WORKSHOP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 14 DECEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Pacific Industrial Company Workshop Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Pacific Industrial Company Workshop Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Pacific Industrial Company (WA) Pty Ltd T/A Pacific Industrial Company. 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The Agreement was approved on 14 December 2015 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 21 December 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 14 December 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Pacific Industrial Company (WA) Pty Ltd, trading as Pacific Industrial Company, sought approval of the Pacific Industrial Company Workshop Enterprise Agreement 2015 in the Fair Work Commission. The dispute revolved around whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The company argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the union contested certain provisions, claiming they did not meet the standards for procedural and substantive fairness.

The court had to determine if the agreement complied with the procedural fairness requirements, specifically whether there was genuine consultation and if the agreement was properly made. The court also needed to assess if the agreement met the criteria for substantive fairness, including whether the terms were reasonable in all the circumstances. The union argued that certain clauses were unfair and did not adequately protect employees’ rights.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements for approval. The commission determined that there was insufficient evidence of genuine consultation and that several provisions were not reasonable. The court noted that the company had failed to provide adequate justification for certain clauses, which were deemed to be against the interests of the employees. Consequently, the application for approval was dismissed. The commission ordered that the agreement could not be registered and advised that any unresolved issues should be addressed through further bargaining or by lodging a new application once the issues had been rectified.

Pacific Industrial Company (WA) Pty Ltd T/A Pacific Industrial Company

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established