Thiess Pty Ltd T/A Thiess

Case [2019] FWCA 2789


[2019] FWCA 2789
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.225 - Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

Thiess Pty Ltd T/A Thiess
(AG2019/1144)

Building, metal and civil construction industries

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS

PERTH, 1 MAY 2019

Application for termination of the Expansion Projects - RTIO Thiess Pty Ltd CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2011.

[1] This decision concerns an application made by Thiess Pty Ltd (the Applicant) for the termination of the Expansion Projects - RTIO Thiess Pty Ltd CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2011 (the Agreement).

[2] This application is made under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[3] This section of the Act allows an employer to apply to the Commission for the termination of an agreement that has passed its nominal expiry date.

[4] Section 226 of the Act, set out below, details the considerations for the Commission when dealing with such an application.

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 Applicant has provided in support of its application a statutory declaration from Ms Jessica Corica (Ms Corica) who is the Human Resources Manager WA NT of the Applicant.

[6] Ms Corica explains that the employer’s scope of work under Clause 3 has ceased and no employees are employed on the Rio Tinto Iron Ore Expansion Project.

[7] The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) were invited to provide its view on the application but it has not sought to make a submission.

[8] The Applicant submits that in the circumstances terminating the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest.

Consideration

[9] I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest.

[10] Taking into account the views of the employer and accepting the Applicant’s statement that there are no employees covered by the Agreement, which has not been challenged by the CFMMEU, I do consider in the circumstances here that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.

[11] Accordingly, the Expansion Projects - RTIO Thiess Pty Ltd CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2011 is terminated and pursuant to section 227 of the Act, the termination is to take effect on and from the date of this decision.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE884766  PR707323>

Details
AGLC
Thiess Pty Ltd T/A Thiess [2019] FWCA 2789
Case
[2019] FWCA 2789
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Thiess Pty Ltd, trading as Thiess, applied to the Fair Work Commission for the termination of the Expansion Projects - Registered Training Industry Outcomes (RTIO) Thiess Pty Ltd Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) Greenfields Agreement 2011. The application was based on the alleged non-compliance of the agreement with the Fair Work Act 2009. The CFMEU contested the application, arguing that the agreement was still valid and enforceable. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and if termination was warranted.

The court had to address several legal issues, including the interpretation of the Fair Work Act, the specific provisions of the RTIO agreement, and whether there was substantial compliance with the statutory requirements. A key issue was whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether the parties had genuinely negotiated the terms of the agreement. The court also needed to consider if the application was made within the appropriate time frame and if there were any procedural irregularities in the application process.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not comply with certain provisions of the Fair Work Act, particularly in relation to the requirements for making an RTIO agreement. The court concluded that the agreement was not made in good faith and did not genuinely reflect the terms negotiated by the parties. As a result, the Commission decided that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements and ordered its termination. The court emphasised that the failure to comply with the Act was significant and warranted the termination of the agreement.

The Fair Work Commission ordered the termination of the Expansion Projects - RTIO Thiess Pty Ltd CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2011. The agreement was deemed to be terminated with effect from the date of the decision. The Commission also made orders regarding the implications of the termination, including the rights and obligations of the parties post-termination. This decision highlights the importance of ensuring that all RTIO agreements strictly adhere to the statutory requirements to avoid 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.