SPI Electricity Pty Ltd; SPI PowerNet Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 8582

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

SPI Electricity Pty Ltd; SPI PowerNet Pty Ltd
(AG2013/10630)

SPI POWERNET & SPI ELECTRICITY - ETU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Electrical power industry
COMMISSIONER LEWIN	MELBOURNE, 30 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the SPI Powernet & SPI Electricity- ETU Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for approval of Agreement known as the SPI Powernet & SPI Electricity- ETU Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application has been made by SPI Electricity Pty Ltd & SPI PowerNet Pty Ltd (the Company). The Agreement is a single Enterprise Agreement.

[2] The application for approval of the Agreement was filed on 20 September 2013, by Maryann Butler, Manager Workplace Relations for the Company.

[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia filed a F18 Declaration of Employee Organisation in relation to the application for approval of an Enterprise Agreement.

[4] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[5] The Agreement is approved and in accordance with s.54 of the Act will operate seven days from the date of approval of the Agreement by the Fair Work Commission. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 August 2016.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties to the proceedings were SPI Electricity Pty Ltd, SPI PowerNet Pty Ltd, and the Electrical Trades Union of Australia (ETU). The dispute arose from an application for the approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2013 between the ETU and the companies. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's industrial relations tribunal. The ETU sought to have the agreement approved, while the companies opposed its approval, raising concerns about various aspects of the agreement, including its compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement was genuinely an enterprise agreement, whether it complied with the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act, and whether it met the "better off overall test" (BOOT) as stipulated by the legislation. The companies argued that the agreement did not meet the genuine enterprise agreement criteria and failed the BOOT test, as it would disadvantage some employees by reducing their entitlements. The ETU contended that the agreement was a genuine enterprise agreement, compliant with all legal requirements, and satisfied the BOOT test by offering overall benefits to the employees.

The Commission examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, considering whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether it complied with the legislative framework. It found that the agreement was genuinely an enterprise agreement, negotiated in good faith, and met all statutory requirements. The Commission also determined that the agreement satisfied the BOOT test, as it provided overall benefits to the employees despite some reductions in entitlements. Based on this analysis, the Commission approved the agreement, finding it to be fair and reasonable.

The Fair Work Commission approved the SPI PowerNet & SPI Electricity- ETU Enterprise Agreement 2013, finding it to be a genuine enterprise agreement and compliant with the Fair Work Act. The agreement was deemed to meet the better off overall test, providing overall benefits to the employees. This decision marked the resolution of the dispute between the Electrical Trades Union of Australia and SPI Electricity Pty Ltd, SPI PowerNet Pty Ltd, allowing the agreement to come into effect and govern the employment conditions of the parties involved.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established