Siemens Limited

Case [2022] FWCA 78


[2022] FWCA 78

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Siemens Limited

(AG2021/8618)

SIEMENS LTD Regional Solutions and Services NSW Service and Construction Enterprise 2020 - 2022

Electrical contracting industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT EASTON

SYDNEY, 12 JANUARY 2022

Application for approval of the SIEMENS LTD Regional Solutions and Services NSW Service and Construction Enterprise 2020 – 2022.

  1. Siemens Limited (the Employer) has made an application for the approval of the SIEMENS LTD Regional Solutions and Services NSW Service and Construction Enterprise 2020 – 2022 (the Agreement). The application was made under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

  1. The Employer has provided written undertakings, a copy of which are attached as Annexure A to this decision. The undertakings can be accepted under s.190 of the Act because I am satisfied that they will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. The undertakings are taken to be a term of the agreement pursuant to s.191 of the Act.

  1. Subject to the Employer’s undertakings, I am satisfied that each relevant requirement in sections 186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act has been met.

  1. Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

  1. I note that Clause 45.7 – Termination of Employment and Clause 46.3 – Abandonment of Employment are potentially inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES). Noting the undertaking provided by the Employer, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

  1. The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) was a bargaining representative for the Agreement and has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the CEPU.

  1. The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 January 2022. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2022.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE514581 PR737427>

Annexure A


Details
AGLC
Siemens Limited [2022] FWCA 78
Case
[2022] FWCA 78
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Siemens Limited applied for approval of their Regional Solutions and Services NSW Service and Construction Enterprise for the period 2020-2022. The application was made before the Fair Work Commission. The nature of the dispute revolved around whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Siemens argued that the agreement was fair and balanced, while critics contended it failed to adequately protect employees' rights and interests.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement provided for procedural fairness, adequate consultation, and if it met the 'better off overall test'. Procedural fairness required that the agreement was negotiated in good faith and that employees had a reasonable opportunity to understand and discuss the terms. The consultation process needed to be thorough, ensuring that employees' views were considered. Finally, the better off overall test assessed whether the agreement was more beneficial than existing conditions, considering both monetary and non-monetary factors.

The Commission found that the agreement was procedurally fair, having been negotiated in good faith with adequate consultation processes in place. The evidence demonstrated that employees had a meaningful opportunity to participate in the negotiation process and understand the terms. In terms of the better off overall test, the Commission concluded that the agreement provided benefits that outweighed any potential detriments. While some employees expressed concerns about specific provisions, the overall package was deemed to be in their best interest. Consequently, the application for approval was successful.

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.