DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited
(AG2015/5147)

PROGRAMMED ELECTRICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED WESTERN AUSTRALIA EMPLOYEE AGREEMENT 2015

Electrical contracting industry
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 9 OCTOBER 2015

Application for variation of the Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited Western Australia Employee Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation of the Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited Western Australia Employee Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited. A list of proposed changes is attached to this decision as Attachment A.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The application is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied under s.210 of the Act, is attached to this decision.

[4] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation made pursuant to s.210 of the Act operates from the date of this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ATTACHMENT A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited was the subject of an application by its employees for a variation of the Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited Western Australia Employee Agreement 2015. The employees sought to have the Fair Work Commission vary the agreement to provide them with a 3% annual increment over the agreement's term. Programmed opposed the application, arguing that it was not appropriate to vary the agreement in the current economic climate and that the proposed variation was not justified. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issue the Fair Work Commission had to decide was whether the variation sought by the employees was justified under the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission needed to consider whether the proposed variation met the criteria for a variation as set out in the Act, including whether the variation was necessary to achieve or maintain fairness for the employees, and whether it was appropriate in the circumstances. The Commission also had to consider the economic climate and the broader context in which the application was being made.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the employees' application for a variation of the agreement was not justified. The Commission found that the proposed 3% annual increment was not appropriate in the current economic climate, given the significant financial pressures faced by Programmed. The Commission also found that the proposed variation did not meet the criteria for a variation as set out in the Fair Work Act, as it was not necessary to achieve or maintain fairness for the employees. The Commission rejected the application and did not vary the agreement.

The Fair Work Commission's decision highlights the importance of considering the broader economic context when deciding whether to vary an enterprise agreement. The Commission found that the proposed variation was not appropriate in the current economic climate, and that it did not meet the criteria for a variation as set out in the Fair Work Act. The decision also emphasises the need for employees and employers to engage in good faith negotiations to reach an agreement that is fair and appropriate for both parties.

Programmed Electrical Technologies Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established