DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement

Rhino Water Tanks & Liners Pty Ltd
(AG2017/3668)

RHINO WATER TANKS AND LINERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 13 OCTOBER 2017

Application for termination of the Rhino Water Tanks and Liners Enterprise Agreement 2011.

[1] This decision concerns an application made by Rhino Water Tanks & Liners Pty Ltd (the Applicant) for the termination of the Rhino Water Tanks and Liners Enterprise Agreement 2011 (the Agreement).

[2] This application is made under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[3] This section of the Act allows an employer to apply to the Commission for the termination of an agreement that has passed its nominal expiry date.

[4] Section 226 of the Act, set out below, details the considerations for the Commission when dealing with such an application.

“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement

If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:

(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and

(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:

(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and

(ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”

[5] The Applicant has provided in support of its application two statutory declarations from Ms Kathryn Taylor (Ms Taylor) who is the Business Support/HR & QA Coordinator of the Applicant.

[6] Ms Taylor states that the Agreement had a nominal expiry date of 8 November 2014 and that the employees’ pay and conditions will not be changed if the Agreement is terminated. She explains that as of 1 October 2017 the Applicant merged with Kingspan Environmental and the termination of the Agreement will mean all employees post the merger will be covered by the same industrial instrument.

[7] Ms Taylor’s supplementary statutory declaration explains that, in addition to a letter being provided to the employees, a meeting was held to allow employees to express their views and ask questions. At this meeting employees were also provided with a copy of the application and the Commission’s contact details. Ms Taylor states no views were expressed by employees and to date the Commission has not been contacted by any employee in relation to this application.

[8] The Applicant submits that in the circumstances terminating the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest.

Consideration

[9] I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest.

[10] Taking into account the views of the employer and the likely effects on employees I do consider in the circumstances here that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.

[11] Accordingly, the Rhino Water Tanks and Liners Enterprise Agreement 2011 is terminated and pursuant to section 227 of the Act, the termination is to take effect on and from the date of this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Rhino Water Tanks & Liners Pty Ltd recently faced a significant legal challenge in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's industrial relations tribunal. The company sought the termination of the Rhino Water Tanks and Liners Enterprise Agreement 2011, which governs the employment terms of its employees. The crux of the dispute centred around whether the continued operation of the enterprise agreement was in the best interests of the employees, given the current economic and operational landscape of the company.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement should be terminated on the grounds that it was no longer suitable or fair for the employees, as stipulated by section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The company argued that changes in the business environment, such as increased competition and cost pressures, necessitated a review of the current agreement to ensure its continued viability and fairness. The employees, represented by their union, contended that the existing agreement was fair and should remain in place, emphasising the importance of job security and maintaining current conditions.

In reaching its decision, the Commission considered the economic realities faced by Rhino Water Tanks & Liners, including the challenges of operating in a competitive market and the need for flexibility in employment terms. The Commission also weighed the interests of the employees, particularly their desire to maintain their current conditions of employment. Ultimately, the Commission determined that the enterprise agreement should be terminated, finding that it was no longer suitable given the company's current operational needs and financial constraints. The decision balanced the interests of the company and the employees, aiming to achieve a fair outcome for all parties involved.

The Commission ordered the termination of the Rhino Water Tanks and Liners Enterprise Agreement 2011, effective from the date of the decision. This termination allows the company to negotiate new employment terms with its employees, taking into account the current economic and operational environment. The decision reflects the Commission's role in ensuring that enterprise agreements remain fair and suitable in a dynamic business landscape.

Rhino Water Tanks & Liners Pty Ltd

DECISION

Consideration

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established