Supercrane Engineered Lifting Technology Summary

[2014] FWCA 5020

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a greenfields agreement

Supercrane Engineered Lifting Technology
(AG2014/1724)

SUPERCRANE ROY HILL AWU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT WATSON	MELBOURNE, 25 JULY 2014

Application for approval of the Supercrane Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Supercrane Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Supercrane Engineered Lifting Technology and The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU). The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[2] I have considered the matters contained in the employer declaration and the declaration made on behalf of the AWU which will be covered by the Agreement.

[3] In my view, the Consultation Term provision in clause 38 of the Agreement is not a consultation term which meets the requirements of ss.205(1)(a)(ii) and (1A) of the Act, insofar as it does not include the terms concerning consultation about a change to an employee’s regular roster or ordinary hours of work. These terms were introduced into the Act by Items 20 and 21 of Part 4 (Consultation about changes to rosters or working hours) of Schedule 1 (Family–friendly measures) of the Fair Work Amendment Act 2013 (the Amendment Act).Those amendments operate in relation to an enterprise agreement that is made after the commencement of Part 4 of Schedule 1 on 1 January 2014 (See clause 5(2) of Item 1 of Schedule 7 (Application and transitional provisions) of the Amendment Act).

[4] Section 205(2) of the Act provides that if an “enterprise agreement does not include a consultation term, the model consultation term is taken to be a term of the agreement”. The model consultation term is found in Schedule 2.3 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009.

[5] As required by s.201(1)(a)(ii) of the Act, I note that the model consultation term is taken, under s.205(2), to be a term of the Agreement.

[6] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In accordance with s.187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that the AWU is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 1 August 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 24 January 2018.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Supercrane Engineered Lifting Technology, sought approval of the Supercrane Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2014. The applicant and the Australian Workers' Union were parties to the agreement, which aimed to govern the employment conditions of workers at the Roy Hill mining project. The application was made under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents to the application, including other unions and the Fair Work Commission, raised concerns about the agreement's provisions on enterprise flexibility, arguing that they conflicted with the spirit and purpose of the Act.

The primary legal issues before the court involved whether the agreement's provisions on enterprise flexibility were consistent with the overarching objectives of the Fair Work Act. The court examined if the agreement facilitated workplace efficiency and productivity while ensuring fair and reasonable terms for employees. It was also necessary to determine whether the agreement's provisions would unduly disadvantage employees and whether they aligned with the Commission's guidelines on enterprise agreements.

The court held that the Supercrane Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2014 did not contravene the Fair Work Act. The agreement's provisions on enterprise flexibility were found to be reasonable and necessary for the efficient operation of the mining project. The court noted that the agreement provided adequate safeguards to protect employees' rights and interests. The court further found that the agreement's terms were fair and balanced, taking into account the interests of both employers and employees. The application for approval was therefore granted.

The court ordered that the Supercrane Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2014 be approved as a certified agreement under section 234 of the Fair Work Act. The agreement was to be registered with the Fair Work Commission and would come into effect on the date of the court's decision. The order ensured that the agreement would govern the employment conditions of workers at the Roy Hill mining project, providing a framework for fair and reasonable workplace practices.

Supercrane Engineered Lifting Technology

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established