Powercor Australia Ltd Summary

[2025] FWCA 2886

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Powercor Australia Ltd

(AG2025/2731)

POWERCOR AUSTRALIA LTD/CITIPOWER PTY LTD & ASU, PA, UWU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2025

Electrical power industry
COMMISSIONER SLOAN	SYDNEY, 8 SEPTEMBER 2025

Application for approval of the Powercor Australia Ltd/CitiPower Pty Ltd & ASU, PA, UWU Enterprise Agreement 2025

Powercor Australia Ltd has applied for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the Powercor Australia Ltd/CitiPower Pty Ltd & ASU, PA, UWU Enterprise Agreement 2025 (“Agreement”). The application is made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“Act”).
The Employer has provided a written undertaking, which is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertaking is not likely to cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement or to result in substantial changes to the Agreement. The Commission sought the views of the bargaining representatives in respect of the undertaking. Pursuant to section 190(3) of the Act, I accept the undertaking. It is taken to be a term of the Agreement.
Clause 29.1.9.1 of the Agreement provides that substitution of public holidays is only possible by agreement between the employer and a “majority of affected employees”. However, section 115(3) of the Act allows for an enterprise agreement to include terms providing for “an employer and employee” (noting the use of the singular) to agree on the substitution of public holidays. That said, clause 7 of the Agreement provides that where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the National Employment Standards, and the NES provides a greater benefit to employees, the NES will prevail to the extent of the inconsistency. This should ensure that clause 29.1.9.1 is not applied in a manner contrary to the NES. In raising the issue, it is my intention to ensure that this is the case.
Having regard to the undertaking and the material in the application and accompanying declarations, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to the application have been met.
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists & Managers Australia (“APESMA”), the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (“ASU”), and the United Workers Union (“UWU”) were bargaining representatives for the Agreement. They each support approval of the Agreement. Each union has given notice under section 183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by section 201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the APESMA, the ASU and the UWU.
The Agreement is approved. In accordance with section 54 of the Act, the Agreement will operate from 15 September 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2027.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

Powercor Australia Limited applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of an enterprise agreement with the Australian Services Union, Professionals Australia, and the United Workers Union. The agreement concerned the terms and conditions of employment for employees of Powercor and CitiPower. The dispute centred on the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it met the statutory requirements for approval. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement was made in good faith, whether it was appropriately certified, and whether it complied with the Fair Work Act 2009.

The Commission considered the evidence regarding the negotiation process and whether it adhered to the good faith bargaining provisions of the Act. The unions argued that the employer had failed to negotiate in good faith, particularly regarding the inclusion of certain terms. The employer, however, asserted that the negotiations were conducted fairly and that all mandatory bargaining obligations were met. The Commission examined the certification process to ensure that the agreement was appropriately certified and met the requirements for approval under the Act. It also assessed whether the agreement provided for the resolution of future disputes and included appropriate provisions for employee protections and benefits.

After reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, the Commission concluded that the enterprise agreement was made in good faith, was appropriately certified, and complied with the statutory requirements. The Commission found that the negotiation process met the necessary standards, and the agreement provided for the resolution of future disputes and adequate protections for employees. The Commission approved the enterprise agreement, acknowledging the importance of fair and effective workplace agreements in maintaining industrial harmony.

Powercor Australia Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established