Turkuaz Trust T/A Turkuaz Painting Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 6929

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Turkuaz Trust T/A Turkuaz Painting Pty Ltd
(AG2014/7573)

TURKUAZ PAINTING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY	MELBOURNE, 1 OCTOBER 2014

Application for approval of the Turkuaz Painting Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Turkuaz Painting Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Turkuaz Trust T/A Turkuaz Painting Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 1 October 2014 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 8 October 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 7 October 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties in this case were Turkuaz Trust T/A Turkuaz Painting Pty Ltd, and the Australian Painters and Decorators Union. The dispute involved the approval of the Turkuaz Painting Enterprise Agreement 2014 under the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The central legal issues the court needed to address were whether the agreement met the requirements for fair and equitable terms and conditions for employees and whether it was consistent with the national employment standards.

The court examined the agreement clause by clause, assessing whether it provided for fair and equitable terms and conditions. It considered whether the agreement met the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act, including provisions related to minimum wages, penalty rates, leave entitlements, and other employment conditions. The court also reviewed the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it complied with the necessary procedural fairness. Ultimately, the court found that the agreement did not adequately address certain aspects of the national employment standards, particularly concerning overtime and penalty rates. The court also noted that the process by which the agreement was negotiated may have been lacking in procedural fairness.

Based on the findings, the court decided not to approve the agreement. The court highlighted specific areas of concern and recommended amendments to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act and the national employment standards. The court emphasised the importance of fair and equitable terms and conditions for employees and the need for procedural fairness in the negotiation process. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements meet all legal requirements before approval.

The court did not make specific final orders as the agreement was not approved. However, it directed the parties to address the identified issues and resubmit the agreement for consideration, ensuring it meets the statutory requirements and procedural fairness.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established