Tyco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wormald

Case [2013] FWCA 8292


[2013] FWCA 8292

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

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

Tyco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wormald
(AG2013/10703)

WORMALD NEWCASTLE SERVICE FIRE ALARMS DIVISION 2013-2016 ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

Electrical contracting industry

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN

SYDNEY, 23 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the Wormald Newcastle Service Fire Alarms Division 2013-2016 Enterprise Agreement.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known asthe Wormald Newcastle Service Fire Alarms Division 2013-2016 Enterprise Agreement (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Tyco Australia t/as Wormald (the Applicant). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) (the Union) has given notice under s.183 of the Act that they wish to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 23 October 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE404925  PR543630>

Details
AGLC
Tyco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wormald [2013] FWCA 8292
Case
[2013] FWCA 8292
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Tyco Australia Pty Ltd trading as Wormald, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Wormald Newcastle Service Fire Alarms Division 2013-2016 Enterprise Agreement. The application was opposed by a number of employees of the company who were concerned about the provisions of the agreement, particularly those relating to shift work and penalties for unauthorised absences. The matter was heard by the Commission in Sydney, with Deputy President Thorne delivering the decision.

The legal issues before the Commission related to whether the agreement provided for the employees' minimum entitlements as required by the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether it met the "better off overall test" as required by the Act. The Commission needed to determine whether the provisions of the agreement were fair and reasonable, and whether they provided for the employees' minimum entitlements in a manner that was better than what they would receive under the applicable awards or other agreements. The Commission also needed to consider whether the agreement provided for appropriate mechanisms for the resolution of workplace disputes.

After considering the arguments and evidence presented by both parties, the Commission found that the agreement met the legal requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission found that the agreement provided for the employees' minimum entitlements, and that the provisions relating to shift work and penalties for unauthorised absences were fair and reasonable. The Commission also found that the agreement provided for appropriate mechanisms for the resolution of workplace disputes, and that it met the "better off overall test". As a result, the Commission approved the agreement.

The Commission made an order approving the Wormald Newcastle Service Fire Alarms Division 2013-2016 Enterprise Agreement, with effect from 1 July 2013. The order also included provisions for the agreement to be registered with the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. The employees who opposed the agreement were given the right to apply to the Commission for a review of the decision within 21 days of the date of the decision.

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.