Schlumberger Australia Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 3374

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Schlumberger Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2014/6061)

SCHLUMBERGER GROUP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Oil and gas industry
COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN	PERTH, 27 MAY 2014

Application for approval of the Schlumberger Group Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] On 16 May 2014, Schlumberger Australia Pty Ltd made application for approval of a single enterprise agreement to be known as the Schlumberger Group Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

[2] The Agreement was made following a ballot on 5 May 2014.

[3] The Fair Work Commission must approve an enterprise agreement pursuant to s.186 of the FW Act if the requirements set out in that section, s.187 and s.188 are met.

[4] I am satisfied, from the material provided to the Commission, that ss.186, 187 and 188, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

[5] The Agreement is approved and will, in accordance with s.54(1) of the FW Act, operate from 3 June 2014.

[6] The nominal expiry date of this Agreement is 26 May 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Schlumberger Australia Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Schlumberger Group Enterprise Agreement 2014. Schlumberger is an oilfield services company that employs approximately 2,000 people in Australia, many of whom are members of the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU). The application was opposed by the AMWU on the basis that the enterprise agreement did not provide adequate protections for employees.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The AMWU argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements for "enterprise agreements" under the Act, specifically that it did not provide for adequate minimum rates of pay and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement. Schlumberger contended that the agreement was consistent with the Act and provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment.

In determining the application, the Commission considered the provisions of the Fair Work Act and the specific terms of the proposed enterprise agreement. The Commission found that the agreement did not provide for adequate minimum rates of pay and conditions of employment for certain employees, in breach of the Act. The Commission noted that the agreement contained provisions that were inconsistent with the provisions of the Act and that it did not provide for adequate protections for employees in certain areas, including pay rates, leave entitlements and redundancy payments. The Commission refused to approve the agreement, finding that it did not meet the requirements for approval under the Act.

The Commission's decision was final and binding, and Schlumberger was required to implement the terms and conditions of the agreement in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The refusal to approve the agreement meant that the employees covered by the agreement would continue to be governed by the terms and conditions of their existing enterprise agreements or the applicable awards. The decision highlights the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and provide adequate protections for employees.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established