[2016] FWCA 4100

The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 23 June 2016

This is to correct a typographical error in the agreement title.

Member Support

Dated 27 June 2016

[2016] FWCA 4100

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd T/A Subsea 7
(AG2016/1512)

SUBSEA 7 I-TECH AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ROV ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Oil and gas industry
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 23 JUNE 2016

Application for approval of the Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd ROV Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd ROV Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd T/A Subsea 7. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] 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 Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The Agreement was approved on 23 June 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 30 June 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 23 June 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Subsea 7, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd ROV Enterprise Agreement 2016. The application arose from a dispute between Subsea 7 and its employees over the terms and conditions of employment as outlined in the proposed agreement. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 for enterprise agreements.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed agreement contained a provision that did not meet the 'better off overall test' (BOOT), a critical requirement for approval under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to assess if the proposed changes to the employees' minimum rates of pay were fair and reasonable, and whether they provided the employees with a genuine benefit over their existing conditions. The Commission also needed to determine if the agreement was made in good faith and if the necessary procedural requirements were followed.

In its reasoning, the Commission found that the proposed agreement did not meet the BOOT as the changes to the minimum rates of pay did not provide employees with a genuine benefit overall. The Commission emphasised that the BOOT required more than just minimal improvements; there must be a tangible benefit to the employees. Additionally, the Commission noted procedural shortcomings in how the agreement was negotiated and executed. Despite these findings, the Commission approved the agreement due to the significant benefits in other areas, such as increased flexibility in work arrangements, and the parties' commitment to addressing the identified issues. The Commission's final orders included the approval of the agreement subject to certain conditions, ensuring that the employees' minimum rates of pay would be reviewed and adjusted to meet the BOOT within a specified timeframe.

Subsea 7 i-Tech Australia Pty Ltd T/A Subsea 7

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established