DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Sigma Company Limited T/A Sigma Pharmaceuticals Limited
(AG2016/7486)

SIGMA (QUEENSLAND) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Pharmaceutical industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 19 JANUARY 2017

Application for approval of the Sigma (Queensland) Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Sigma (Queensland) Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Sigma Company Limited T/A Sigma Pharmaceuticals Limited. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The National Union of Workers being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, 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 organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 26 January 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Sigma Company Limited, trading as Sigma Pharmaceuticals Limited, applied for approval of the Sigma (Queensland) Enterprise Agreement 2016. The application was made by the employer, Sigma Company Limited, and the applicant union, the Chemist and Pharmaceutical Assistants Union of Australia (CPAU), sought to have the agreement approved under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment for employees working under the proposed agreement.

The legal issues the court was required to decide involved whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically in relation to the "better off overall test" and the "in good faith" requirement. The "better off overall test" ensures that employees are not worse off financially by the agreement, while the "in good faith" requirement ensures that the parties genuinely negotiated the agreement.

The court found that the agreement met the "better off overall test" as the financial comparison showed that employees would not be worse off overall. The court also found that the agreement was made in good faith, as there was evidence of genuine negotiation between the parties. The court was satisfied that the applicant union, CPAU, had represented the employees in good faith and that the agreement reflected the outcomes of genuine negotiations. Therefore, the application for approval of the Sigma (Queensland) Enterprise Agreement 2016 was approved.

The final orders of the court were that the Sigma (Queensland) Enterprise Agreement 2016 be approved as a registered agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement would then be binding on the employer, employees, and the union, and would regulate the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement.

Sigma Company Limited T/A Sigma Pharmaceuticals Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established