DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

UGL Kaefer
(AG2015/5852)

UGL KAEFER, AWU ONSHORE MECHANICAL MAINTENANCE SERVICES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	SYDNEY, 27 OCTOBER 2015

Application for approval of the UGL KAEFER, AWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the UGL KAEFER, AWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by UGL Kaefer. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Australian Workers’ Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) 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 3 November 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 14 October 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Workers' Union (AWU) sought approval of the UGL KAEFER, AWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2015. The agreement was an amalgamation of two existing agreements, one covering employees of UGL KAEFER and the other employees of Kaefer. The AWU submitted the agreement was fairly negotiated and met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. UGL KAEFER did not oppose the application but argued the agreement should not be approved because it contained unfair provisions, including the classification of employees as ‘casual employees’ who had no annual leave or long service leave entitlements.

The primary issue before the Commission was whether the agreement was fairly negotiated and met the requirements for approval under the Act. The Commission also needed to determine if the agreement contained any unfair provisions that would render it unapprovable. In particular, the Commission needed to assess the fairness of the classification of employees as ‘casual employees’ and the impact this had on their entitlements.

The Commission found the agreement was fairly negotiated and contained no unfair provisions. The Commission accepted the AWU's evidence that the agreement was the result of genuine and meaningful negotiations and that the parties had acted in good faith. The Commission also found that the classification of employees as ‘casual employees’ was not unfair because it reflected the nature of the work performed by the employees and their employment arrangements. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for a transition period during which employees could be converted to permanent employment and that the agreement included provisions for the payment of additional leave entitlements to employees who were converted to permanent employment.

In light of the above, the Commission approved the agreement. The Commission made an order approving the agreement as a certified agreement under the Act. The agreement will now apply to the employees of UGL KAEFER and Kaefer covered by the agreement.

UGL Kaefer

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established