DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Terrex Pty Ltd T/A Terrex Seismic
(AG2016/5346)

TERREX GROUP EMPLOYEE (CASUAL EMPLOYEES) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Mining industry
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 3 OCTOBER 2016

Application for approval of the Terrex Group Employee (Casual Employees) Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Terrex Group Employee (Casual Employees) 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 Terrex Pty Ltd T/A Terrex Seismic. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] 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.

[3] The Agreement is to be read together with the undertaking given by the employer in Schedule A attached. The undertaking is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 10 October 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 3 October 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

SCHEDULE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Terrex Pty Ltd, trading as Terrex Seismic, applied for approval of the Terrex Group Employee (Casual Employees) Enterprise Agreement 2016 before the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred around the agreement's compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009 and the associated regulations, specifically in terms of casual employment provisions. The applicant argued that the agreement was necessary for its business operations, while objections were raised regarding the agreement's compliance with the Act's requirements for casual employment.

The court had to decide if the agreement met the legal standards for casual employment as set out in the Act and whether the provisions regarding loading, shift patterns, and penalties were appropriate. The applicant needed to demonstrate that the agreement was necessary for its business operations and that the casual employees were genuinely casual. The court also had to assess if the agreement adequately provided for the rights and obligations of casual employees.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission considered the nature of the applicant's business and the necessity of casual employment within it. The Commission determined that the agreement was not appropriate as it did not sufficiently provide for the loading and shift patterns of casual employees, nor did it adequately address the penalty provisions. The Commission found that the agreement failed to meet the requirements of the Act regarding casual employment, particularly in terms of providing for reasonable notice of work and the ability to refuse work without incurring a penalty. Consequently, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the agreement.

Terrex Pty Ltd T/A Terrex Seismic

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established