[2013] FWCA 819 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd
(AG2013/199)
TAD-MAR ELECTRICAL PTY LTD SINGLE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013
Electrical contracting industry | |
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O'CALLAGHAN | ADELAIDE, 7 FEBRUARY 2013 |
Application for approval of the Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd Single Enterprise Agreement 2013.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd Single Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.
[2] The Agreement was not lodged within 14 days after it was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b) of the Act I consider it fair to extend the time for making this application to 30 January 2013.
[3] 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.
[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 January 2016.
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code J, AE899726 PR533826>
- AGLC
- Tad-Mar Electrical Pty Ltd [2013] FWCA 819
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 819
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act, particularly whether it provided for minimum rates of pay and conditions of employment, and whether it was made in good faith and without coercion. The primary contention was over the classification of employees as either "Electrician" or "Electrical Worker," with different pay rates and conditions attached to each classification. The Commission needed to determine whether the classifications were appropriate and whether the agreement was fair and reasonable.
The Commission found that the agreement did not adequately address the classification of employees, which led to uncertainty in pay rates and conditions. It was noted that the classifications in the agreement did not align with industry standards and were not based on the actual duties performed by the employees. Consequently, the Commission held that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements for approval. The decision highlighted the importance of accurate classification and the need for agreements to be fair and reasonable, reflecting the true nature of the employment relationship.
The Commission refused to approve the agreement and ordered the parties to negotiate a revised agreement that would meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act. This included ensuring that employee classifications were accurate and reflective of their roles, and that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.