UBOS Australia Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 3143

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

UBOS Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2014/664)

UBOS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2018

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	BRISBANE, 13 MAY 2014

Application for approval of the UBOS Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the UBOS Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by UBOS Australia 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] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The notice of employee representational rights issued by the Applicant to employees of UBOS Australia Pty Ltd did not strictly comply with the prescribed form as required under s. 174 of the Act. This is because it referred to “Fair Work Australia” instead of “Fair Work Commission”. It is obvious that the Applicant had used the form approved prior to 1 January 2013. I am however satisfied that s. 25B of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 applies to the notice with the consequence that reference to “Fair Work Australia” is taken to be of reference to “Fair Work Commission”. The provisions of s. 174 do not express a contrary intention which would have the result that s. 25B not apply. In the circumstances I am also satisfied the issuing of the notice in the form pre-2013 did not have any effect on the employee’s rights to appoint a bargaining representative.

[6] The Agreement was approved on 13 May 2014 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 20 May 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 13 May 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The application for approval of the UBOS Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018 was heard by the Fair Work Commission. The applicant, UBOS Australia Pty Ltd, sought the commission’s approval for the proposed enterprise agreement. The agreement was to govern the employment conditions of employees within the organisation. The dispute arose from negotiations between the applicant and the union representing the employees, which resulted in the proposed agreement.

The central legal issues for the commission to address were whether the proposed agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009 and if the agreement was in the best interests of the employees. The commission had to consider various factors, including whether the agreement provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees, whether it had been genuinely negotiated, and if the agreement was consistent with the principles of the national workplace relations system.

In delivering its decision, the commission found that the proposed agreement met the statutory requirements for approval. The commission acknowledged that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated between the parties and provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees. The commission also determined that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, taking into account the overall benefits and protections provided. Consequently, the commission approved the UBOS Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018.

The final orders of the commission included the approval of the UBOS Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018, effective from the date of the decision. The agreement was to apply to all employees covered by the agreement, and the commission’s approval was to be recorded on the National Workplace Relations System. The applicant and the union were directed to take all necessary steps to give effect to the approved agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established