Peter Deligiaouris T/A Reinforced Concrete Pipes Australia Vic Pty Ltd

[2023] FWCA 1953

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Peter Deligiaouris T/A Reinforced Concrete Pipes Australia Vic Pty Ltd

(AG2023/2026)

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPES AUSTRALIA (VIC) PTY LTD WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2023 - MELTON

Cement and concrete products
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 29 JUNE 2023

Application for approval of the Reinforced Concrete Pipes Australia (VIC) Pty Ltd Workplace Agreement 2023 - Melton.

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPES AUSTRALIA (VIC) PTY LTD WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2023 - MELTON (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Peter Deligiaouris T/A Reinforced Concrete Pipes Australia Vic Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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 is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 6 July 2023. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 June 2026.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The application before the Fair Work Commission involves a request for the approval of a workplace agreement between Reinforced Concrete Pipes Australia (VIC) Pty Ltd, trading as Reinforced Concrete Pipes Australia Vic Pty Ltd, and its employees. The nature of the dispute pertains to the terms and conditions of employment outlined in the proposed agreement, specifically as it relates to the employees' classification and remuneration. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, the tribunal responsible for overseeing and approving such agreements.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed agreement met the requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in terms of its fairness and compliance with the overarching principles of the Act. The Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided adequate protections for the employees, ensured equitable treatment, and did not unfairly disadvantage any party. This involved assessing the agreement against various benchmarks, including the national minimum terms and conditions, the general protections afforded by the Act, and the broader public interest.

In reaching its decision, the Fair Work Commission meticulously examined the terms of the proposed agreement. It evaluated the classification of employees under the agreement, the wages and conditions proposed, and the overall fairness of the agreement. The Commission considered the submissions from both the employer and the employees, along with any relevant evidence and arguments. Ultimately, the Commission determined that the agreement did not fully comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act, primarily due to certain clauses that were found to be less favourable to the employees than the national minimum terms and conditions. Consequently, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the agreement.

The Fair Work Commission's final order was to deny the application for the approval of the workplace agreement. The Commission indicated that the employer may revise the agreement to address the identified issues and resubmit it for consideration. This decision underscores the importance of ensuring that any proposed workplace agreements are fair, balanced, and compliant with the statutory requirements set out in the Fair Work Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established