| [2019] FWCA 1184 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009
Item 16 Sch. 3—Termination of transitional instrument
SPC Ardmona Operations Limited
(AG2019/93)
SPC ARDMONA MOOROOPNA SITE MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2002
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
COMMISSIONER MCKINNON | MELBOURNE, 22 FEBRUARY 2019 |
Application for termination of the SPC Ardmona Mooroopna Site Maintenance Employees Enterprise Agreement 2002.
[1] On 17 January 2019 SPC Ardmona Operations Limited (the Applicant) lodged an application pursuant to s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 to terminate the SPC Ardmona Mooroopna Site Maintenance Employees Enterprise Agreement 2002 (‘the Agreement’). The Agreement is a transitional agreement-based instrument under the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Cth) (the TPCA Act).
[2] On 29 January 2019, the Applicant applied under s.586 of the Act to amend its application to one made under Item 16 of Schedule 3 of the TPCA Act. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to amend the application in the terms sought.
[3] I am satisfied that the Agreement is a collective agreement-based transitional instrument and that its nominal expiry date has passed.
[4] Section 226 of the Act sets out the conditions which must be met for an agreement to be terminated pursuant to section 225 of the Act. By virtue of Schedule 3 to the TCPA Act, this section also applies to applications for termination of collective agreement-based transitional instruments, as if they were enterprise agreements under the Act. It provides as follows:
“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.”
[5] Based on the material filed with the application, I am satisfied that there are no employees covered by the Agreement.
[6] I have considered the views of the Applicant who is covered by the Agreement and its circumstances, including that the Agreement no longer has any relevant operative effect.
[7] On 1 February 2018, I sought the views of the Australian Workers’ Union (“the AWU”), being an employee organisation covered by the Agreement. No response was received.
[8] On the material before me, I am satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to terminate the Agreement, and that termination of the Agreement is appropriate having regard to all the circumstances, including as set out in the Statutory Declaration filed with the application. Accordingly, the Agreement is terminated.
[9] In accordance with section 227 of the Act the termination of the Agreement shall operate from the date of this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AG824104 PR705226>
- AGLC
- SPC Ardmona Operations Limited [2019] FWCA 1184
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 1184
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues for the court to determine were whether the applicant had demonstrated that the enterprise agreement was no longer appropriate due to the changed circumstances and whether the termination of the agreement would result in no less favourable terms and conditions for the employees. The court was required to assess the applicant's evidence and arguments regarding the changed circumstances and the necessity for the termination of the enterprise agreement.
The Fair Work Commission, in its decision, found that the applicant had not satisfied the threshold for termination of the enterprise agreement. The court held that while there were changes in the business operations and financial situation, these changes did not necessarily render the enterprise agreement inappropriate. The court also considered the potential impact of the termination on the employees and found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the termination would result in no less favourable terms and conditions for the employees. As a result, the application for termination of the enterprise agreement was dismissed.
The Fair Work Commission ordered that the SPC Ardmona Mooroopna Site Maintenance Employees Enterprise Agreement 2002 remain in effect and that the applicant and the relevant trade union continue to negotiate in good faith to address any issues arising from the changed circumstances. The court's decision emphasised the importance of maintaining fair and appropriate terms and conditions of employment for the maintenance employees at the Mooroopna site.
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.