Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd

Case [2023] FWCA 127


[2023] FWCA 127

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd

(AG2022/5402)

2022 PERNOD RICARD WINEMAKERS PTY LTD., CELLAR DOORS (BAROSSA VALLEY) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

Wine industry

COMMISSIONER PLATT

ADELAIDE, 13 JANUARY 2023

Application for approval of the 2022 Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd., Cellar Doors (Barossa Valley) Enterprise Agreement.

  1. An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the 2022 Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd., Cellar Doors (Barossa Valley) Enterprise Agreement (the Agreement) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd (the Applicant). The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

  1. The matter was allocated to my Chambers on 10 January 2023.

  1. On 13 January 2023, I conducted a telephone conference with the parties to seek clarification about aspects of the Agreement and invited the Applicant to address these matters including through the provision of an undertaking. The issues raised included a pre-approval issue regarding vote notification. It was identified that employees were not notified of the time of the vote at least 7 clear days prior to the commencement of voting. The Applicant submitted that the Commission should consider this a minor technical or procedural error which did not disadvantage the covered employees pursuant to s.188(2) of the Act.

  1. The defect was that the employees were not advised the time of the vote until 6 days prior. I note that the Applicant extended the vote by a day. I am satisfied, taking into consideration s.188(2) of the Act, that the procedural or technical error is minor and that the employees were not likely to have been disadvantaged, and accordingly, that there has been a genuine agreement.

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

·   Clause 13.20 of the Agreement covers abandonment of employment. However, the Agreement does not state that employees deemed to have abandoned their employment are entitled to notice of termination. 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 where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES, and the NES provides a greater benefit, the NES will apply to the extent of the inconsistency. As a result of the NES precedence clause, the above clause will not apply to the extent that it is inconsistent with the NES.

  1. The Applicant has submitted an undertaking in the required form dated 13 January 2023. The undertaking deals with the following topics:

·   The NES precedence clause will be relied upon in relation to any inconsistencies that may arise regarding the entitlement to notice of termination for abandonment of employment.

·   A Higher Duties entitlement has been added to the Agreement.

·   Clause 10.2(a) of the Restaurant Industry Award 20020 has been incorporated into the Agreement.

·   A part time employee must be given a minimum of eight full days off work per four-week period.

  1. No bargaining representatives were appointed.

  1. The undertaking appears to meet the requirements of s.190(3) of the Act and I have accepted it. As a result, the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

  1. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 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 30 June 2023.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE518878  PR749646>

Details
AGLC
Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd [2023] FWCA 127
Case
[2023] FWCA 127
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd, seeking approval of the 2022 Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd, Cellar Doors (Barossa Valley) Enterprise Agreement. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian federal statutory body responsible for the resolution of workplace disputes. The primary concern was the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement, which governs the terms and conditions of employment for the employees at the Barossa Valley cellar doors.

The court had to determine whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. This included examining whether the agreement was made in good faith, provided for a genuine enterprise, and was in the best interests of the employees. The court also needed to consider if the agreement had been appropriately negotiated, whether it contained the required minimum terms and conditions, and if the employees had been given a reasonable opportunity to be involved in the negotiation process.

In examining these issues, the court considered the submissions from both parties and the evidence presented. It took into account the nature of the changes proposed in the agreement, the negotiation process, and the extent to which employees were involved in the process. The court found that the proposed agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, and was therefore approved. The court was satisfied that the agreement had been made in good faith, involved a genuine enterprise, and was in the best interests of the employees. It also found that the agreement contained the required minimum terms and conditions and that the employees had been given a reasonable opportunity to be involved in the negotiation process.

The final orders of the court approved the 2022 Pernod Ricard Winemakers Pty Ltd, Cellar Doors (Barossa Valley) Enterprise Agreement, subject to certain conditions and modifications. The court also ordered that the agreement be registered with the Fair Work Commission and that it would take effect from the date of the decision.

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.