Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 4479

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/1170)

TRANSFIELD SERVICES - GIPPSLAND WATER MECHANICAL ASSET MAINTENANCE WORKPLACE AGREEMENT 2012

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 5 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Transfield Services - Gippsland Water Mechanical Asset Maintenance Workplace Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Transfield Services - Gippsland Water Mechanical Asset Maintenance Workplace Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] An undertaking has been given in relation to clauses 2.1, 27 and 27 of the Agreement and this undertaking has become a term of the Agreement in accordance with s.191(2) of the Act and is appended at Appendix A.

[4] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 12 July 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 August 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE402247 PR538668>
APPENDIX A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Transfield Services – Gippsland Water Mechanical Asset Maintenance Workplace Agreement 2012. The agreement was to cover employees who were part of the mechanical asset maintenance team within Gippsland Water, a statutory corporation. The application was made under the Fair Work Act 2009, which provides the legislative framework for workplace agreements and the role of the Commission in approving such agreements. The nature of the dispute centred on whether the agreement met the legal criteria for approval, including provisions on minimum entitlements, dispute resolution mechanisms, and whether it complied with the Fair Work Act.

The primary legal issues for the Commission to consider were whether the agreement provided at least the minimum entitlements set out in the relevant modern award, whether it adhered to the lawful terms and conditions as required by the Act, and whether it included a dispute resolution procedure. Furthermore, the Commission had to assess whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated between the employer and the employees, and if the approval would be in the public interest, considering the unique context of Gippsland Water being a statutory corporation.

The Fair Work Commission concluded that the agreement met all the necessary criteria for approval. The agreement provided employees with entitlements that were at least equal to the minimum standards set out in the relevant award, included a dispute resolution mechanism, and was genuinely negotiated. The Commission also found that granting approval would be in the public interest, taking into account the specific circumstances of Gippsland Water and the necessity of maintaining efficient mechanical asset maintenance services. Therefore, the application for approval of the workplace agreement was successful.

As a result of the decision, the Transfield Services – Gippsland Water Mechanical Asset Maintenance Workplace Agreement 2012 was approved by the Fair Work Commission. The agreement would now be binding on the employees and Gippsland Water, providing a framework for the terms and conditions of employment for the mechanical asset maintenance team.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established