Premiair Automation and Controls Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 166


[2016] FWCA 166
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Premiair Automation and Controls Pty Ltd
(AG2015/7652)

PREMIAIR AUTOMATION & CONTROLS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT - 2015

Electrical contracting industry

COMMISSIONER ROE

MELBOURNE, 11 JANUARY 2016

Application for approval of the Premiair Automation & Controls Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement - 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Premiair Automation & Controls Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement - 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Premiair Automation and Controls Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] 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 does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The Agreement was approved on and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 18 January 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 November 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE417394 PR575970>

Details
AGLC
Premiair Automation and Controls Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 166
Case
[2016] FWCA 166
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves an application by Premiair Automation and Controls Pty Ltd for the approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2015. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, as the agreement is subject to the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness of the agreement, particularly whether it was made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act and whether the necessary steps for employee consultation and approval were properly followed.

The court was tasked with determining whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated between the employer and the employees, and whether it was made in good faith. Additionally, the court needed to assess if the agreement contained all the mandated minimum terms and conditions, and if the process for obtaining employee approval was fair and transparent. The primary focus was on whether the employer had adequately consulted with the employees and whether the agreement was fairly presented to them.

The Fair Work Commission held that the agreement was genuinely negotiated and made in good faith, as evidenced by the employer's efforts to consult with the employees and the thorough documentation provided. The court found that all the mandated minimum terms and conditions were included in the agreement. Furthermore, the process for obtaining employee approval was deemed fair, as it involved an independent body overseeing the voting process and ensuring that employees were properly informed about the implications of the agreement. Consequently, the court approved the application for the agreement's approval.

The Fair Work Commission's decision to approve the application signifies a recognition of the employer's efforts to negotiate and consult with employees in good faith. This approval underscores the importance of following the mandated procedures for enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act, ensuring that both employers and employees are treated fairly throughout the negotiation and approval process.

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.