DECISION

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

Sibelco Australia Limited
(AG2015/4967)

SIBELCO AUSTRALIAN LIMITED GILLMAN ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Mining industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER	SYDNEY, 22 SEPTEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Sibelco Australia Limited Gillman Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Sibelco Australia Limited Gillman Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU), being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and will operate from 29 September 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 September 2018.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Sibelco Australia Limited involved an application for the approval of the Gillman Enterprise Agreement 2015. The applicant, Sibelco Australia Limited, sought the court's endorsement of the agreement, which was intended to govern the employment terms of its employees at the Gillman site. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness of the agreement's negotiation and whether it complied with relevant legislative requirements. The Fair Work Commission was the tribunal tasked with determining the fairness of the agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The court was required to decide whether the agreement was made in accordance with the procedural requirements set out in the Act. This involved examining whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated, whether there was adequate consultation between the parties, and whether the agreement was in the best interests of the employees. The court also needed to consider whether the agreement met the criteria for a protected action, which would exempt it from certain dispute resolution processes.

The court found that the agreement was genuinely negotiated and that the negotiation process adhered to the legislative requirements. The court was satisfied that there was adequate consultation and that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees. The court also found that the agreement met the criteria for a protected action, as it was made in good faith and for the purposes of an industrial dispute. Based on these findings, the court approved the agreement and dismissed the application for review. The approval of the agreement ensures that the terms and conditions of employment for the employees at the Gillman site are governed by the agreed-upon terms.

Sibelco Australia Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established