Roll Surface Technologies Pty Limited Summary

[2013] FWCA 5361

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Roll Surface Technologies Pty Limited
(AG2013/7820)

ROLL SURFACE TECHNOLOGIES - THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS’ UNION (WESTERN PORT) AGREEMENT 2013-2016

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 5 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the Roll Surface Technologies - The Australian Workers’ Union (Western Port) Agreement 2013-2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Roll Surface Technologies - The Australian Workers' Union (Western Port) Agreement 2013-2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Roll Surface Technologies Pty Limited. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Australian 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. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 12 August 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 July 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Roll Surface Technologies Pty Limited, an employer, and the Australian Workers' Union (Western Port), a union representing employees. The dispute centred around the application for approval of the Roll Surface Technologies - The Australian Workers’ Union (Western Port) Agreement 2013-2016. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's independent industrial relations tribunal. The union sought approval of the agreement under section 174 of the Fair Work Act 2009, arguing that it met the criteria for registration and would provide fair and equitable outcomes for both parties. The employer contested the application, asserting that certain provisions were not in line with the requirements of the Act or were not appropriately negotiated.

The central legal issues revolved around whether the agreement contained provisions that were unfair or did not meet the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the employer argued that certain provisions related to working hours and penalties were not appropriately negotiated and did not provide for a fair and equitable outcome for employees. The union contended that all provisions were fair and had been negotiated in good faith. The court had to determine whether the agreement met the statutory criteria for approval and whether any provisions were unfair within the meaning of the Act.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the evidence and arguments presented, found that the agreement met the criteria for approval. The Commission noted that while some provisions related to working hours and penalties might be considered stringent, they were not unfair in the context of the negotiations and the nature of the industry. The Commission determined that the agreement provided for a fair and equitable outcome for both parties, and thus, it was appropriate for the agreement to be approved. The Commission highlighted the importance of good faith negotiations and the balance of interests between employers and employees in reaching this decision.

The final orders of the Commission were that the Roll Surface Technologies - The Australian Workers’ Union (Western Port) Agreement 2013-2016 be approved as a registered agreement under section 175 of the Fair Work Act. This approval ensures that the agreement is legally binding and enforceable, providing a framework for industrial relations between the employer and the union for the duration of the agreement.

Roll Surface Technologies Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established