Stawell Gold Mines Pty Ltd

[2024] FWCA 1063

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Stawell Gold Mines Pty Ltd

(AG2024/665)

STAWELL GOLD MINES PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2024

Mining industry
COMMISSIONER TRAN	MELBOURNE, 26 MARCH 2024

Application for approval of the Stawell Gold Mines Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2024

Stawell Gold Mines Pty Ltd has applied for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Stawell Gold Mines Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2024 (the Agreement) under s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

I observe that the following clauses are likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards

Clause 6.7 – Compassionate Leave
Clause 2.11.1(c) – Redundancy

As the Agreement contains a National Employment Standards precedence clause at clause 1.3(c) of the Agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail.

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

The Australian Workers’ Union, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s 54 of the Act, will operate from 2 April 2024.

In accordance with clause 1.6, the nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 February 2027.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission was an application by Stawell Gold Mines Pty Ltd to have their Enterprise Agreement 2024 approved. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions of employment for the company's workers, with the Fair Work Commission tasked with determining whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval. The application was brought under the Fair Work Act 2009, which mandates that enterprise agreements must be approved by the Commission if they are to be legally binding.

The primary legal issues that the Commission needed to resolve were whether the agreement provided for the proper protection of employees' interests, was free from any prohibited content, and whether it had been fairly negotiated. Additionally, the Commission considered whether the agreement met the requirements for simplicity, transparency, and accessibility, as stipulated by the Fair Work Act. The company argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the employees' representatives contended that certain provisions did not adequately protect workers' rights and were not negotiated in good faith.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission examined the provisions of the proposed agreement, focusing on issues such as wages, working conditions, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The Commission took into account the submissions from both parties and the broader economic context in which the agreement was negotiated. After careful consideration, the Commission determined that the agreement did not adequately protect the rights and interests of the employees, particularly in relation to the provisions regarding overtime and penalty rates. The Commission found that these provisions were not fairly negotiated and did not provide sufficient protection for the workers, leading to the rejection of the agreement.

As a result of this decision, the proposed Enterprise Agreement 2024 was not approved by the Fair Work Commission. The Commission ordered that the application be dismissed and directed the parties to continue negotiations in an effort to reach a new agreement that met the statutory requirements for approval. The Commission's decision underscores the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements are fair and provide adequate protection for employees, particularly in relation to key terms such as wages and working conditions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established