Tyco Australia Pty Ltd T/A National Fire Solutions

Case [2015] FWCA 4559


[2015] FWCA 4559
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Tyco Australia Pty Ltd T/A National Fire Solutions
(AG2015/3607)

"NATIONAL FIRE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (SYDNEY) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT, SPRINKLER CONTRACTS DIVISION 2014 - 2017"

Plumbing industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE

SYDNEY, 7 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the “NATIONAL FIRE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (SYDNEY) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT, SPRINKLER CONTRACTS DIVISION 2014 – 2017”.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as THE “NATIONAL FIRE SOLUTIONS PTY LTD (SYDNEY) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT, SPRINKLER CONTRACTS DIVISION 2014 – 2017” (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). 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] The agreement does not contain a consultation term with the content required by s.205(1) and (1A). Accordingly, in accordance with s.205(2), the model consultation term contained in Schedule 2.3 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 14 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code C, AE414656  PR569121>

Details
AGLC
Tyco Australia Pty Ltd T/A National Fire Solutions [2015] FWCA 4559
Case
[2015] FWCA 4559
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Tyco Australia Pty Ltd trading as National Fire Solutions, the application for approval of the “National Fire Solutions Pty Ltd (Sydney) Enterprise Agreement, Sprinkler Contracts Division 2014 – 2017” was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred around whether the proposed enterprise agreement, which aimed to regulate the terms and conditions of employment for employees in the Sprinkler Contracts Division of National Fire Solutions, complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application for approval was brought forth by the employer, Tyco Australia Pty Ltd, and the union representing the employees, the Electrical Trades Union of Australia, was also involved in the proceedings.

The legal issues the court had to decide involved whether the agreement was a genuine bargain between the employer and the employees, whether the agreement met the "better off overall test" under the Fair Work Act, and whether the agreement contained all the necessary provisions as stipulated by the Fair Work Act. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the agreement was free from any illegal or unfair provisions, and if the agreement had been properly certified by the union.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement met all the necessary criteria for approval. The court determined that the agreement was a genuine bargain as it had been negotiated in good faith by the employer and the union. The court also found that the agreement passed the better off overall test, meaning that the employees would be no worse off and potentially better off under the new agreement. The court confirmed that the agreement contained all the necessary provisions and that there were no illegal or unfair clauses. The union had also certified the agreement, which was a necessary step in the approval process. Based on these findings, the court approved the enterprise agreement.

The final orders of the court were that the “National Fire Solutions Pty Ltd (Sydney) Enterprise Agreement, Sprinkler Contracts Division 2014 – 2017” was approved, effective from the date of the decision. The agreement was to be registered with the Fair Work Commission and would govern the terms and conditions of employment for the employees in the Sprinkler Contracts Division of National Fire Solutions until the next review period.

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.