DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Port Phillip & Westernport CMA
(AG2014/8246)

PORT PHILLIP AND WESTERNPORT CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

State and Territory government administration
COMMISSIONER WILSON	MELBOURNE, 10 DECEMBER 2014

Application for variation of the Port Phillip and Westernport catchment Management Authority Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to an enterprise agreement known as the Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the “Agreement”). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the “Act”). It has been made by the Port Phillip & Westernport Catchment Management Authority. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The variation to the Agreement is as follows:

Clause 26.1: Clause 26.1 of the Agreement (‘Long Service Leave’) is amended to include a new sub clause ‘e’ which provides that an employee who has completed seven years of continuous service will be entitled to pro-rata long service leave.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

[4] The variation to the Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.216 of the Act, will operate on and from 10 December 2014. The consolidated Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the applicant, Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority, applied for a variation of the existing enterprise agreement. This case involved the negotiation of terms and conditions of employment for staff within the organisation. The respondent, the Australian Services Union, opposed the application. The primary legal issue was whether the proposed changes to the agreement, which included alterations to salary packaging, leave provisions, and other employment conditions, were justifiable under the relevant legislative framework.

The Commission assessed whether the proposed changes met the statutory requirements for an enterprise agreement variation. It considered whether the changes were in the best interests of the employees, whether they were negotiated in good faith, and whether they provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. The Commission also examined whether the changes complied with the principles of procedural fairness and whether they addressed genuine workplace issues. Ultimately, the Commission found that the application did not adequately demonstrate that the proposed changes were necessary or in the best interests of the employees, leading to the dismissal of the application.

The Commission's reasoning was grounded in the need to ensure that any changes to an enterprise agreement are fair, reasonable, and beneficial to the employees. It emphasised the importance of maintaining procedural fairness in the negotiation and variation process. The Commission also highlighted the need for the applicant to provide comprehensive evidence supporting the necessity and benefits of the proposed changes. In light of the findings, the application for variation was dismissed. The Commission did not make any orders as the application was dismissed without merit.

Port Phillip & Westernport CMA

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established