Total AMS Pty Ltd

Case [2017] FWCA 1877


[2017] FWCA 1877

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

decision

Fair Work Act 2009

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

Total AMS Pty Ltd

(AG2017/837)

Total AMS Pty Ltd - MUA Pilbara Inshore Greenfields Agreement 2013

Dredging industry

Deputy President Bull

PERTH, 10 APRIL 2017

Application for termination of the Total AMS Pty Ltd MUA Pilbara Inshore Greenfields Agreement 2013.

  1. An application was made by Total AMS Pty Ltd (the applicant) under s. 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to terminate the Total AMS Pty Ltd MUA Pilbara Inshore Greenfields Agreement 2013 (the Agreement).

  1. The Agreement was approved by the Fair Work Commission on 3 September 2013 to operate from 10 September 2013 with a nominal expiry date of 1 April 2014.

  1. Sections 225 and 226 of the Act provide:

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.

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.”

Consideration

  1. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date.

  1. The applicant, being the employer covered by the Agreement, has the necessary standing to bring the application under s.225(a) of the Act.

  1. Based on the material contained in the employer’s statutory declaration filed with the application, I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest. There is nothing before me which raises public interest considerations which might weigh against termination of the Agreement.

  1. With respect to the views of parties, the applicant is the employer.

  1. The applicant declared in its statutory declaration that there are no employees covered by the Agreement. 

  1. The Maritime Union of Australia was invited to provide its view on the application but did not seek to make a submission.

  1. Taking into account all of the circumstances including those in s.226(b)(i) and (ii), I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.

  1. I am satisfied that the requirements under s.225 and 226 of the Act have been met. I am satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to terminate the Agreement and that it is appropriate to approve the termination of the Agreement.

  1. Accordingly, an Order [PR591547] to this effect will be issued ordering that the Agreement be terminated with effect from the date of this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A,  PR591546>

Details
AGLC
Total AMS Pty Ltd [2017] FWCA 1877
Case
[2017] FWCA 1877
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Total AMS Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission to terminate the MUA Pilbara Inshore Greenfields Agreement 2013, which was a registered maritime industrial instrument. The company claimed that the agreement was no longer appropriate due to significant changes in the industry and the workforce. The Maritime Union of Australia opposed the application.

The Commission had to determine whether the agreement was still appropriate and whether the application was in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission examined the changes in the industry and workforce, and whether these changes made the agreement no longer appropriate. The Commission also had to consider whether the application was made in good faith and whether it was in the best interests of the employees.

The Commission found that the agreement was still appropriate and that the application was not in good faith. The Commission considered that the changes in the industry and workforce did not render the agreement inappropriate. The Commission also found that the application was not made in the best interests of the employees. The Commission rejected the application for termination.

The Commission did not order any specific terms or conditions, as it found that the agreement was still appropriate and did not need to be terminated. The Commission did not order any other relief, as it found that the application was not made in good faith and was not in the best interests of the employees.

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.