DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2016/5380)

SULZER AUSTRALIA PTY LTD TOWER FIELD SERVICES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT VICTORIA 2016

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 13 OCTOBER 2016

Application for approval of the Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd Tower Field Services Enterprise Agreement Victoria 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd Tower Field Services Enterprise Agreement Victoria 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd. 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.

[3] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 20 October 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 12 October 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The application before the Fair Work Commission concerns the approval of the Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd Tower Field Services Enterprise Agreement Victoria 2016. The applicant, Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd, sought to have the agreement approved under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred around whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval, particularly whether it provided for the safety, health, and welfare of employees, and whether it was free from any unlawful provisions.

The court was tasked with examining several legal issues, including whether the agreement adequately addressed the safety, health, and welfare of employees, and whether it included any terms that were contrary to public policy or that failed to meet the standards set by the Fair Work Act 2009. The key contention was whether the agreement provided sufficient protections for employees working in potentially hazardous conditions, and whether any provisions within the agreement contravened relevant workplace laws.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement contained provisions that were not in compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically in relation to certain health and safety requirements. The Commission noted that while the agreement aimed to protect employees, it fell short in some areas by not sufficiently addressing critical safety measures and welfare provisions. Consequently, the application for approval was dismissed due to these shortcomings. The Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring that all enterprise agreements provide robust protections for employee safety, health, and welfare, and that they comply with all applicable workplace laws.

Sulzer Australia Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established