| [2018] FWCA 1148 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009
Sch. 3, Item 16 - Application to terminate collective agreement-based transitional instrument
TESA Resources Pty Ltd
(AG2018/278)
TESA RESOURCES (ALTONA AREA) CERTIFIED AGREEMENT 2003-2006
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON | MELBOURNE, 8 MARCH 2018 |
Application for termination of the TESA RESOURCES (Altona Area) Certified Agreement 2003-2006.
[1] On 30 January 2018, TESA Resources Pty Ltd (Applicant) applied, pursuant to Schedule 3, Item 16 of the Fair Work (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Transitional Act) to terminate the TESA RESOURCES (Altona Area) Certified Agreement 2003-2006 (Agreement). The Agreement covers the Applicant, the employees of the Applicant and the Australian Workers Union (AWU) as specified in clause 4 of the Agreement. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date.
[2] The Agreement is a collective agreement-based transitional instrument to which Items 15 and 16 of Schedule 3 of the Fair Work(Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009 (Transitional Act) apply. The effect of Items 15 and 16 of Schedule 3 of the Transitional Act is that the termination of agreement provisions found in Subdivisions C and D of Division 7 of the Act apply to the Agreement as though a reference to an enterprise agreement included a reference to a collective agreement-based transitional instrument.
[3] Section 225 of the Act provides:
“225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date
If an enterprise agreement has passed its nominal expiry date, any of the following may apply to the FWC for the termination of the agreement:
(a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;
(b) an employee covered by the agreement;
(c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.”
[4] Section 226 of the Act provides:
“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement
If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:
(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and
(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:
(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and
(ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”
[5] The AWU is an organisation covered by the Agreement. In correspondence to my Chambers of 12 February 2018, the AWU advised that it does not oppose the application. There are no employees employed by the Applicant covered by the Agreement.
[6] Based on the material contained in the Applicant’s declaration filed with the application, I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest. Taking into account all of the circumstances including those in ss.226(b)(i) and (ii), I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement. There is nothing before me which raises public interest considerations which might militate against the termination of the Agreement. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to approve the termination of the Agreement, and I terminate the Agreement.
[7] The termination will operate from 8 March 2018.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AG836581 PR600639>
- AGLC
- TESA Resources Pty Ltd [2018] FWCA 1148
- Case
- [2018] FWCA 1148
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the significant changes in circumstances warranted the termination of the certified agreement. The court had to assess whether the changes were fundamental and pervasive enough to justify the conclusion that the conditions upon which the agreement was based had fundamentally altered. This assessment involved examining the nature and extent of the changes, their impact on the agreement, and whether these changes rendered the continued application of the agreement unreasonable.
In considering these issues, the court examined the evidence provided by both parties regarding the changes in the economic environment, operational practices, and the industry. The court found that while there had been changes, they did not reach the threshold required to justify the termination of the agreement. The court concluded that the changes, while significant, did not fundamentally alter the underlying conditions upon which the agreement was based. Consequently, the application for termination was dismissed. The court's decision was based on the finding that the changes, while notable, did not sufficiently undermine the agreement to warrant its termination.
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.