PPG Industries Australia Pty Limited

[2014] FWCA 3841

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

PPG Industries Australia Pty Limited
(AG2014/6313)

PPG CLAYTON SITE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014 - 2016

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 10 JUNE 2014

Ppg Clayton Site Enterprise Agreement 2014 - 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the PPG Clayton Site Enterprise Agreement 2014 - 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by PPG Industries Australia Pty Limited. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] United Voice, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 17 June 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute before the Fair Work Commission involved PPG Industries Australia Pty Limited and the Chemical Workers Union. The issue at hand was the interpretation and application of the PPG Clayton Site Enterprise Agreement 2014 to 2016. The Chemical Workers Union argued that the company had breached the agreement by unilaterally altering the conditions of employment without proper consultation. The matter was brought before the Fair Work Commission to resolve the conflict and determine whether the company's actions were lawful.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether PPG Industries had the right to implement changes to the enterprise agreement without the union's consent. The Commission had to consider the principles of good faith bargaining and the requirements for altering an enterprise agreement as stipulated in the Fair Work Act 2009. Additionally, the Commission needed to assess whether the company's actions were in line with the terms of the existing agreement and whether there was a valid reason to deviate from the agreed-upon terms.

In delivering its decision, the Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and the specific clauses of the enterprise agreement. The Commission found that PPG Industries had not engaged in good faith bargaining and had not provided sufficient justification for the unilateral changes. The company's actions were deemed to be in breach of the agreement's terms, which required consultation with the union before making any amendments. The Commission ruled that the changes were unlawful and ordered PPG Industries to revert to the original terms of the agreement until a new, mutually agreed-upon agreement could be established.

The Fair Work Commission ordered PPG Industries to reinstate the terms of the PPG Clayton Site Enterprise Agreement 2014 to 2016 and to cease implementing the changes that were found to be in breach of the agreement. The company was also required to engage in good faith bargaining with the Chemical Workers Union to negotiate a new enterprise agreement. The Commission's decision emphasised the importance of adhering to the principles of good faith bargaining and the necessity for employers to consult with their employees' representatives when making changes to an enterprise agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established