DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited
(AG2015/2668)

SOUTHERN CROSS ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING LIMITED ELECTRICAL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN	PERTH, 28 MAY 2015

Variation of enterprise agreement.

[1] This is an application by Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited (Applicant) for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement.

[2] The enterprise agreement is the Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited Electrical Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Agreement).

[3] The application is made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act).

[4] The Agreement commenced on 28 October 2014 and its nominal expiry date is 20 October 2018.

[5] In support of the application, the Applicant has provided:

Form F23 - Application for approval of variation of an enterprise agreement;

Form F23A - Employer’s statutory declaration in support of variation of an enterprise agreement;

a copy of the varied agreement with the track-changes; and

a signed varied Agreement.

[6] A majority of employees who case a valid vote approved the variations on 30 April 2015.

[7] The variations are operative from 28 May 2015.

[8] A consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited, an employer, was involved in a dispute with an employee regarding the variation of an enterprise agreement. The employee argued that the employer had failed to follow proper procedures when implementing the variation. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary issue before the Commission was whether the employer had complied with the necessary legal requirements when implementing a variation to the enterprise agreement. This included whether the employer had provided adequate notice and whether the variation was in accordance with the applicable laws.

The Fair Work Commission considered the evidence presented by both parties and examined the specific provisions of the Fair Work Act and the relevant enterprise agreement. The Commission found that the employer had not strictly adhered to the required procedures for varying the agreement. Despite this, the Commission determined that the employee had not suffered any significant detriment as a result of the procedural shortcomings. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the variation could stand but ordered the employer to take specific steps to rectify the procedural failures in future dealings. This included ensuring that all necessary notices and consultations were properly conducted.

The outcome of the case underscores the importance of following proper legal procedures when making changes to enterprise agreements. Employers must be aware of their obligations to ensure that variations are implemented correctly to avoid potential disputes. The Fair Work Commission's decision serves as a reminder that while procedural errors can have consequences, they do not necessarily invalidate the changes made to the agreement if no significant detriment is caused. The employer was required to comply with the remedial orders issued by the Commission to prevent similar issues in the future.

Southern Cross Electrical Engineering Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established