DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

R E Spence & Co Pty Ltd T/A Spence Doors
(AG2015/1900)

R.E. SPENCE & CO P/L CHELTENHAM VICTORIA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Timber and paper products industry
COMMISSIONER BLAIR	MELBOURNE, 19 FEBRUARY 2015

Application for approval of the R.E. Spence & Co P/L Cheltenham Victoria Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the R.E. Spence & Co P/L Cheltenham Victoria Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by R E Spence & Co Pty Ltd t/as Spence Doors.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

[3] The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, being the bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 26 February 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2016.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R E Spence & Co Pty Ltd trading as Spence Doors, the Australian Industrial Relations Commission was asked to consider the application for approval of the 2014 Cheltenham Victoria Enterprise Agreement. The applicant, the employer, sought to implement the agreement to govern the employment terms of its employees. The application arose amidst a dispute between the employer and the union representing the employees, the Transport Workers Union of Australia, which objected to the proposed changes in the agreement.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the requirements of section 230 of the Fair Work Act 2009. This included determining if the agreement was "bargained in good faith" and if it contained provisions that were "free of coercion, undue influence, and harassment." The union's objections centred on concerns that the proposed changes would negatively affect the employees' working conditions and entitlements, and that the bargaining process had not been conducted in a manner that satisfied the statutory requirements for good faith bargaining.

The Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties, including the bargaining records, communications, and submissions. The Commission concluded that the employer had engaged in good faith bargaining and that the proposed agreement did not contain provisions that were coerced, influenced unduly, or involved harassment. The Commission noted that while there were disagreements between the parties, the process itself was not marked by any significant procedural flaws or misconduct. Consequently, the Commission approved the application for the agreement's registration, finding it compliant with the statutory requirements.

In light of the findings, the Commission registered the Spence Doors Enterprise Agreement 2014, effective from the date of the decision. This registration means that the agreement will now govern the employment terms and conditions of the employees, subject to the rights and obligations set out in the Fair Work Act and other applicable laws.

R E Spence & Co Pty Ltd T/A Spence Doors

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established