Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited

[2013] FWCA 6093

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited
(AG2013/2392)

SOUTHERN CROSS ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING LIMITED ROY HILL AWU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 26 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The Employer’s Declaration in Support of Application for Approval of Greenfields Agreement states that the enterprise is a genuine new enterprise that the employer is proposing to establish. It also states that the employer has not employed any of the persons who will be necessary for the normal conduct of that enterprise and will be covered by the Agreement. I am therefore satisfied that the requirements of s.172(2)(b) have been met and as a consequence the Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

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

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is four years from the date of this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited applied for approval of the Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013. The application was made under section 179 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents to the application were the Australian Workers' Union, Rio Tinto Iron Ore Pty Ltd and Fortescue Metals Group Limited. The respondents argued that the agreement was not in the best interests of the employees to whom it applied.

The key legal issue before the Court was whether the agreement was in the best interests of the employees. The Court considered the principles set out in section 179(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Court found that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, as it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and provided for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements. The Court also found that the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace, and provided for the resolution of disputes in a timely and efficient manner.

The Court approved the agreement, subject to certain modifications. The modifications related to the provisions of the agreement that dealt with the calculation of overtime, the provisions that dealt with the calculation of penalty rates, and the provisions that dealt with the calculation of shift differentials. The Court found that these provisions were not in the best interests of the employees, as they did not provide for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. The Court also found that these provisions did not provide for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements. The Court made orders approving the agreement, subject to the modifications.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established