UGL FM Services Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 5668

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

UGL FM Services Pty Ltd
(AG2013/8016)

DTZ SYDNEY OPERA HOUSE (MAINTENANCE) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2016

Plumbing industry
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 16 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the DTZ Sydney Opera House (Maintenance) Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the DTZ Sydney Opera House (Maintenance) Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made by UGL FM Services, 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 ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia - Plumbing Division - NSW Branch, and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union NSW Construction and General Branch being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved in accordance with s.54 of the Act and will operate from 23 August 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

UGL FM Services Pty Ltd brought an application to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the DTZ Sydney Opera House (Maintenance) Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2016. The agreement was a proposed modification to the existing enterprise agreement between the company and its employees. The applicants sought approval for the new agreement, which would replace the existing one. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness and the terms of the proposed agreement.

The court was tasked with determining whether the proposed agreement was procedurally fair and whether the terms within the agreement were reasonable in the circumstances. This involved examining the process by which the agreement was negotiated and the content of the agreement itself. The court needed to ensure that the process was transparent and that the employees had a fair opportunity to participate in the negotiation process. Additionally, the court assessed whether the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, taking into account the economic and social context of the agreement.

The court found that the process by which the agreement was negotiated was procedurally fair, as the company had given adequate notice and provided the necessary information to the employees. The court also determined that the terms of the agreement were reasonable, as they balanced the interests of both the employees and the company. The court approved the agreement, noting that it met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. The court's decision was based on a thorough examination of the negotiation process and the terms of the agreement, ensuring that it was fair and reasonable for all parties involved.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established