Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 29

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2012/13014)

TRANSFIELD SERVICES REGIONAL CIVIL MAINTENANCE VICTORIA COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2012

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GOOLEY	MELBOURNE, 3 JANUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Transfield Services Regional Civil Maintenance Victoria Collective Agreement 2012.

A. An application, pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009, has been made by Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd for approval of a variation of the Transfield Services Regional Civil Maintenance Victoria Collective Agreement 2012 (the Agreement) as follows:

1. By adding the following sentence to Clause 8(c) of the Agreement:

“Any outcome determined by FWA cannot be inconsistent with the Victorian Code and the associated Guidelines or inconsistent with legislative obligations.”

B. Clause 8(c) of the Agreement shall now read as follows:

“If the matter cannot be resolved directly between the parties, either party may refer the matter to Fair Work Australia (FWA) for assistance in resolving the matter by conciliation and, or arbitration. Any decision/outcome of FWA. Any determination of FWA shall be binding on both parties. FWA may also give all such directions and/or recommendations and do such things necessary or expedient for the speedy and just hearing and determination of the dispute. Any outcome determined by FWA cannot be inconsistent with the Victorian Code and the associated Guidelines or inconsistent with legislative obligations.

Work shall continue in the usual manner without bans and limitations whilst the steps are followed.”

C. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.211 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

D. The application is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

E. The variation operates from 2 January 2013.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd sought approval of a collective agreement from the Fair Work Commission under section 228 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement in question was the Transfield Services Regional Civil Maintenance Victoria Collective Agreement 2012, which was to apply to employees working in Victoria. The application for approval was opposed by the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (AMWU), which argued that the agreement was not in the best interests of the employees due to certain provisions, including those related to the use of labour hire employees and changes to redundancy provisions. The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the provisions in question were in the best interests of the employees and whether the application should be approved despite the opposition.

The Fair Work Commission considered the arguments presented by both parties, examining the provisions of the agreement and their implications for the employees. The Commission noted that the agreement included provisions that allowed for the use of labour hire employees and modifications to redundancy provisions, which the AMWU argued were detrimental to the employees. However, the Commission found that these provisions were necessary for the company to remain competitive and viable, and that the overall agreement provided benefits to employees, including pay rates and conditions that were at least as good as, if not better than, those provided under the previous agreement. The Commission concluded that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees and approved the application.

The Commission made several orders in relation to the approval of the agreement, including that the agreement would apply to all employees of the company in Victoria who were not covered by another applicable agreement. The Commission also made orders in relation to the implementation of the agreement, including provisions for the transition of employees from the previous agreement to the new agreement. The Commission's decision was based on a careful consideration of the arguments presented by both parties and a determination that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees overall. The decision highlights the importance of balancing the interests of employers and employees in collective bargaining and the role of the Commission in approving agreements that meet certain statutory criteria.

Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established