[2018] FWCA 231
The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 11 January 2018.
The change replaces mentions of the Australian Workers Union with the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Tasmania Branch at paragraphs 4 and 6 on page 2 of the Decision.
Matthew Wilson
Associate to Deputy President Barclay
Dated 17 January 2018
| [2018] FWCA 231 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.222 - Application for approval of a termination of an enterprise agreement
Skilled Group Ltd
(AG2017/5719)
SKILLED GROUP LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2010 - 2012
Tasmania | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT BARCLAY | HOBART, 11 JANUARY 2018 |
Application for termination of the Skilled Group Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2010 - 2012.
[1] The Applicant has applied for the termination of the the Skilled Group Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2010 - 2012 (the Agreement).
[2] The Application is governed by sections 225 and 226 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). Those provisions are in the following terms:
225. 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.
226. 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.
[3] The nominal expiry date for the Agreement is 15 September 2012. Accordingly the Applicant is entitled to apply for the termination of the Agreement.
[4] The Agreement related to the Applicant as the only employer and all employees who may have been covered by the Agreement were represented by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Tasmania Branch.
[5] The Applicant deposed in the statutory declaration accompanying the Application that there were no employees covered by the Agreement and that there were no circumstances in which employees may be covered by the Agreement in the future. That is, termination of the Agreement would not affect the parties to it.
[6] The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Tasmania Branch has confirmed1 that there are no employees working under the Agreement. The employees who formerly worked under the agreement (who I infer were labour hire employees) had their employment transferred to Fonterra. Accordingly the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Tasmania Branch consented to the termination of the Agreement.
[7] On 20 December 2017 the parties agreed that a hearing of the Application was not necessary and the matter could be dealt with in chambers.
[8] It is clear that it is not contrary to the public interest to terminate an agreement which has no application to employees employed in a workplace. The employer and the employee organisation which represents the employees formerly covered by the agreement consent to the termination of the Agreement.
[9] Accordingly I order that the Agreement is terminated. Pursuant to s 227 of the Act the termination operates from 20 December 2017.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
1 By email to the Commission dated 28 November 2017
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE881805 PR599460>
- AGLC
- Skilled Group Ltd [2018] FWCA 231
- Case
- [2018] FWCA 231
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the FWC involved the interpretation of the collective agreement, specifically whether the changes in Skilled Group's operations justified a termination of the agreement. The company argued that substantial changes in its business model and structure warranted a renegotiation or termination of the existing agreement. The CFMEU, on the other hand, contended that the changes did not fundamentally alter the nature of the business or the employment relationship to the extent that would necessitate a new agreement.
In its decision, the FWC examined the nature and extent of the changes in Skilled Group's operations. The Commission found that while there were significant changes in the company's business, these changes did not fundamentally alter the classification of employees or the nature of the work they performed. The FWC emphasised the importance of maintaining continuity in employment relationships, particularly in light of the principle of good faith bargaining. Consequently, the FWC determined that the changes did not provide a sufficient basis for terminating the existing collective agreement. The application for termination was dismissed.
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.