| [2022] FWCA 3249 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
PWG King And Sons Pty Ltd
(AG2022/3725)
PWG KING & SONS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2022
| Manufacturing and associated industries | |
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT MILLHOUSE | MELBOURNE, 16 SEPTEMBER 2022 |
Application for approval of the PWG KING & SONS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2022
An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the PWG KING & SONS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2022 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act). It has been made by PWG King And Sons Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
The notice of vote does not contain the place of the vote. Further, the employees covered by the Agreement were not provided with access to a copy of the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2020, which is incorporated into the Agreement. Having regard to the material before the Commission I am satisfied that:
(a) the errors identified at [2] constitute minor procedural or technical errors for the purposes of s 188(2)(a) of the Act; and
(b) the employees to be covered by the Agreement were not likely to have been disadvantaged by the error.[1]
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.
I observe that the following clauses are likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES). However, noting clause 4.2 of the Agreement, I am satisfied the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES:
- Clause 7.4(a) provides that the date of termination for an unexplained absence is the date that the employer determines that it has exhausted all reasonable attempts to notify the employee and/or the employee has not provided a reasonable excuse for their absence. This may be inconsistent with s 117(1) of the Act, which provides that an employer may not terminate an employee’s employment without notice of the date of termination, which may not be a date before the notice is given.[2]
- Clause 20.2 provides that the employer may require an employee to take annual leave to meet operational requirements or to reduce their accrued leave balance. This clause is not qualified in the manner prescribed by s 93(3) of the Act, being that the requirement must be reasonable.
- Clause 25.1 appears to limit recognised public holidays under the Agreement to 12 gazetted days. This may not be consistent with s 115(1)(b) of the Act, which provides for any other day prescribed as a public holiday under State or Territory laws.
The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s 183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s 201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.
The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s 54 of the Act, will operate from 23 September 2022. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 July 2025.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE517475 PR745961>
[1] Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Limited t/a RMAX Rigid Cellular Plastics and Others [2019] FWCFB 318
[2] Bienias v Iplex Pipelines Australia Pty Limited[2017] FWCFB 38 at [58]
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE517475 PR745961>
- AGLC
- PWG King And Sons Pty Ltd [2022] FWCA 3249
- Case
- [2022] FWCA 3249
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court needed to decide included whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether it provided for the fair and efficient resolution of workplace issues. The court also needed to consider if the agreement was made in good faith, and whether it provided for a safety net of minimum entitlements.
The court found that the agreement met all the necessary statutory requirements. It was concluded in good faith, provided for the fair and efficient resolution of workplace issues, and ensured minimum entitlements were met. The agreement was comprehensive, covering various aspects of employment, including wages, hours of work, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The court was satisfied that the agreement would provide a stable and predictable workplace environment.
The court approved the enterprise agreement, noting its balanced approach and the evident effort made by both parties to reach a mutually beneficial outcome. The approval was made subject to the conditions that the agreement be registered with the Fair Work Commission and that any disputes arising from its interpretation or application be referred to the appropriate tribunal.
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.