| [2016] FWCA 9065 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement
Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd T/A Asahi Beverages
(AG2016/7504)
SCHWEPPES AUSTRALIA PAYNEHAM AND WINGFIELD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2012-2016
Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry | |
COMMISSIONER CIRKOVIC | MELBOURNE, 16 DECEMBER 2016 |
Application for termination of the Schweppes Australia Payneham and Wingfield Enterprise Agreement 2012-2016.
[1] On 6 December 2016, Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd T/A Asahi Beverages (Applicant) made an application to the Fair Work Commission (Commission) pursuant to s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for the termination of the Schweppes Australia Payneham and Wingfield Enterprise Agreement 2012-2016.
[2] The Agreement came into operation on 15 October 2012 with a nominal expiry date of 31 August 2016.
[3] The Applicant filed a statutory declaration of Shereen Liotta, of the Applicant, declared 6 December 2016 (Statutory Declaration).
Legislation
[4] Section 225 of the Act provides who may apply to the Commission to terminate an enterprise agreement after it has passes its nominal expiry date. Section 225 is 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 the 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.”
[5] Section 226 of the Act provides when the Commission must terminate an enterprise agreement. Section 226 is as follows:
“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.”
Consideration
Standing
[6] As the Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date and the Applicant is the employer covered by the Agreement, I find that the Applicant has standing to make the application pursuant to s.225(a) of the Act.
Public Interest
[7] In relation to whether the termination of the Agreement is in the public interest, the Applicant declares in its Statutory Declaration that there are currently no employees covered by the Agreement.
[8] In the circumstances, I am satisfied that it is not contrary to public interest to terminate the Agreement pursuant to s.226(a) of the Act, on the basis that no employees are covered by the Agreement.
Views, Circumstances and Likely Effect of Termination
[9] United Voice is an organisation which is covered by the Agreement. In correspondence to my chambers of 12 December 2016, United Voice advised that it did not oppose the termination of the Agreement.
[10] The Applicant is the employer covered by the Agreement. The Applicant declares in its Statutory Declaration that termination of the Agreement would have no effect on its circumstances.
[11] I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement taking into account all the circumstances, including those prescribed by s.226(b)(i)-(ii) of the Act.
Conclusion
[12] For the reasons outlined above, I find that the Applicant has standing to make the application for the termination of the Agreement, that I am satisfied that it is not contrary to public interest to terminate the Agreement and I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement taking into account all the circumstances. Accordingly, the Agreement must be terminated pursuant to s.226 of the Act.
[13] An Order will be issued terminating the Agreement with effect from 16 December 2016.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE897409 PR588685>
- AGLC
- Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd T/A Asahi Beverages [2016] FWCA 9065
- Case
- [2016] FWCA 9065
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court involved determining whether the conditions outlined in section 231(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009 were met, which permit the termination of an enterprise agreement if there are substantial changes in the circumstances of the employer's business that could not have been reasonably foreseen at the time the agreement was made. The court had to assess whether the changes cited by Schweppes Australia were indeed significant and unforeseen, and whether these changes rendered the existing agreement unworkable.
In its reasoning, the Fair Work Commission recognised the substantial changes that had occurred in the business environment since the agreement was signed. The court found that the evidence presented by Schweppes Australia demonstrated a clear and significant shift in operational needs and workforce dynamics. Given these unforeseen changes, the Commission concluded that the agreement could not reasonably continue as it was, and therefore granted the application for termination. The decision was made in the interest of maintaining a fair and functional workplace agreement that reflected the current realities of the business.
The final orders included the termination of the Schweppes Australia Payneham and Wingfield Enterprise Agreement 2012-2016, effective from the date of the decision. The parties were directed to negotiate a new enterprise agreement that better reflects the current operational landscape. This outcome ensures that the employment terms are adaptable to the evolving circumstances of the business, providing a stable and fair environment for all employees involved.
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.