Rivapak Pty Ltd

Case [2020] FWCA 3484


[2020] FWCA 3484
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009

Sch. 3, Item 16 - Application to terminate collective agreement-based transitional instrument

Rivapak Pty Ltd
(AG2020/1657)

RIVAPAK ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2008

Agricultural industry

COMMISSIONER PLATT

ADELAIDE, 2 JULY 2020

Application for termination of the Rivapak Enterprise Agreement 2008.

Summary

[1] On 12 June 2020, The Australian Industry Group filed an application on behalf of Rivapak Pty Ltd (Rivapak) pursuant to Item 16, Schedule 3 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act (the Transitional Act) to terminate the Rivapak Enterprise Agreement 2008 (the Agreement).

[2] On 17 June 2020, I issued Directions requiring Rivapak to produce a table identifying the disadvantages to employees, should the Agreement be terminated, and to provide that table, the form F28 Application, the Statutory Declaration of Ms Michelle Mundie and the Directions to all employees and employee organisations covered by the Agreement.

[3] On the same day, I received an email from the Australian Industry Group advising that the Directions had been complied with and that there would be no disadvantages to the employees if the Agreement was terminated. There would only be benefits as set out in the table previously annexed to the Statutory Declaration.

[4] Ms Mundie’s Statutory declaration is summarised as follows:

  The Agreement has been expired since 31 December 2011.

  At the time the Agreement was implemented, there were only benefits to workers not otherwise provided for in the pre-reform Vegetable Processing (South Australia) Award.

  Since then, the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and the modern Horticulture Award 2010 (the Award) have been introduced which would now otherwise apply to the employees covered by the Agreement.

  The Award has more generous benefits than the Agreement.

  Many of the benefits are already provided to the employees which means the Agreement is only of marginal relevance at the workplace level.

  The employees have been consulted with at a face to face meeting and through written communications.

  Terminating the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest.

  The Agreement is creating an unnecessary administrative burden on the Applicant.

  Employees will not suffer any detriment.

[5] No party opposed the terminating of the Agreement.

Legislation

[6] Item 16 of Schedule 3 of the Transitional Act provides as follows:

“16 Collective agreement-based transitional instruments: termination by agreement

16(1) Subdivision D of Division 7 of Part 2-4 of the FW Act (which deals with termination of enterprise agreements after their nominal expiry date) applies in relation to a collective agreement-based transitional instrument as if a reference to an enterprise agreement included a reference to a collective agreement-based transitional instrument.”

[7] The provisions of Subdivision D of Division 7 of Part 2-4 of the Act are as follows:

“225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

If an enterprise agreement has passed its nominal expiry date, any of the following may apply to FWC for the termination of the agreement:

(a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;

(b) an employee covered by the agreement;

(c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.

226 When FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement

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

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

(b) 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.

227 When termination comes into operation

If an enterprise agreement is terminated under section 226, the termination operates from the day specified in the decision to terminate the agreement.”

Conclusion

[8] In having regard to s.226 of the Act and based on the material before me, I am satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to terminate the Agreement and it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement taking into account all the circumstances.

[9] In accordance with s.227 of the Act, the termination will take effect from 2 July 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AG870422  PR720694>

Details
AGLC
Rivapak Pty Ltd [2020] FWCA 3484
Case
[2020] FWCA 3484
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Rivapak Pty Ltd and the relevant trade union, where the union applied to terminate the Rivapak Enterprise Agreement 2008. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission, with Deputy President T Mortimer presiding. The union sought to terminate the agreement, arguing that it had become out of date and no longer served the interests of the employees.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the enterprise agreement had indeed become out of date and whether termination was in the best interest of the employees. The union contended that changes in the business environment, such as technological advancements and changes in the workforce, necessitated a new agreement. Rivapak Pty Ltd argued that the existing agreement remained fair and appropriate, and that there was no compelling reason to terminate it.

In delivering the decision, Deputy President Mortimer examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the changes in the business environment since the agreement was made. The Deputy President found that while some aspects of the agreement were outdated, the overall agreement still served the interests of the employees. The Deputy President also noted that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the agreement was no longer fair and appropriate. As a result, the application for termination was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that the application to terminate the Rivapak Enterprise Agreement 2008 was dismissed, and the agreement remained in effect. The Deputy President also directed the parties to continue to negotiate in good faith to address any issues that may arise in the future.

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.