Simplot Australia Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 236

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Simplot Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2012/14398)

SIMPLOT AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED AND AMWU AND CEPU ECHUCA ENTERPRISE BARGAINING AGREEMENT 2012

Food, beverages and tobacco manufacturing industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 22 JANUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Simplot Australia Pty Limited and AMWU and CEPU Echuca Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Simplot Australia Pty Limited and AMWU and CEPU Echuca Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Simplot Australia Pty Ltd. 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 Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2), I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 29 January 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Simplot Australia Pty Ltd sought approval of an enterprise bargaining agreement with the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union, under the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was heard by the Fair Work Commission. The primary dispute involved whether the proposed agreement met the "better off overall test" (BOOT) required for approval under the Act. The BOOT requires that, overall, employees must be at least as well off under the agreement as they would be under the applicable award or safety net provisions.

The legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed agreement provided for terms and conditions that were at least as good as those provided by the relevant awards or safety net provisions. This involved assessing various aspects of the agreement, including wages, hours of work, and other employment conditions. The Commission also considered submissions from the parties and relevant stakeholders on the economic and social impact of the proposed agreement.

The Commission found that the proposed agreement did indeed meet the BOOT. It concluded that the agreement provided for terms and conditions that were, on balance, at least as good as those provided by the relevant awards or safety net provisions. The Commission took into account various factors, including wage increases, improved working conditions, and other benefits for employees. The Commission also considered the potential economic impact of the agreement on the parties and the broader industry. After weighing all these factors, the Commission was satisfied that the agreement was fair and reasonable and met the statutory requirements for approval.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Simplot Australia Pty Ltd and AMWU and CEPU Echuca Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2012, finding it met the better off overall test. The Commission determined that the proposed agreement provided for terms and conditions that were, on balance, at least as good as those provided by the relevant awards or safety net provisions. The Commission's decision was based on a comprehensive assessment of the agreement's provisions, economic and social impact, and submissions from the parties and stakeholders.

Simplot Australia Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established