[2013] FWCA 8096 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement
Skilled Group Ltd
(AG2013/1847)
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
COMMISSIONER CRIBB | MELBOURNE, 16 OCTOBER 2013 |
Application for termination of the ATIVO Godfrey Hirst/Riverside Textile Metals Labour Hire Agreement 2009 - 2011.
[1] This decision concerns an application by Skilled Group Limited (Skilled) under section 225 of the Fair Work Act2009 (the Act).
[2] The application seeks to terminate the ATIVO Godfrey Hirst/Riverside Textile Metals Labour Hire Agreement 2009 - 2011 (the Agreement). The Agreement is a collective agreement-based transitional instrument for the purposes of the Transitional Act with a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2011.
The relevant legislation
[3] Subdivision D of Division 7 of Part 2-4 of the Act states:
“225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date
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 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement
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.
227 When termination comes into operation
If an enterprise agreement is terminated under section 226, the termination operates from the day specified in the decision to terminate the agreement.”
[4] A statutory declaration was received from Ms C Ingleby, Manager of Workplace Relations Advisory Service of Skilled Group Limited, dated 4 July 2013. The statutory declaration stated that the Agreement only covered employees of Skilled who were engaged to perform work for its then client, Godfrey Hirst Australia, at its Geelong site. Further, it was indicated that Skilled does not currently have a contract with Godfrey Hirst Australia to supply labour to the Geelong site and that Skilled ceased to supply labour under the Agreement on or around 14 December 2012. Also, the statutory declaration stated that, since that date, Skilled does not engage any employees who would be covered by the Agreement.
[5] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) (the Union) was advised of the application. The Union notified the Commission that it did not wish to make any submissions and did not oppose the application. There are no employees affected by the proposed termination of the Agreement.
[6] The views of the employer and the Union have been taken into account and I am satisfied that the termination of the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest (section 226(a) of the Act).
[7] In accordance with section 226(b) of the Act, I have considered the circumstances of the matter and have concluded that the termination of the Agreement is appropriate.
[8] The termination will take effect from today’s date, 16 October 2013.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE877028 PR543311 >
- AGLC
- Skilled Group Ltd [2013] FWCA 8096
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 8096
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues that the court needed to decide were whether the changes in circumstances were substantial enough to render the agreement incapable of being performed, and if Skilled Group Ltd had a valid basis to seek termination under the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act. The court had to assess whether the continued operation of the agreement would be unreasonable or unjust and whether termination was the appropriate remedy.
The Federal Circuit Court determined that the changes in circumstances were indeed substantial enough to warrant the termination of the agreement. The court found that the insolvency of ATIVO Godfrey Hirst Pty Ltd significantly altered the original terms and conditions of the agreement, making it unreasonable and unjust to continue its operation. The court held that the agreement could no longer be performed in its original form, and therefore, termination was justified under the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the application for termination was successful.
The court's final order was to terminate the ATIVO Godfrey Hirst/Riverside Textile Metals Labour Hire Agreement 2009 - 2011, effective from a date specified in the judgment. The order also provided for the continuation of certain rights and obligations of the parties as per the terms set out in the judgment.
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.