UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd

Case [2022] FWCA 477


[2022] FWCA 477

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.225—Enterprise agreement

UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd

(AG2022/223)

Manufacturing and associated industries

COMMISSIONER O’NEILL

MELBOURNE, 11 FEBRUARY 2022

Application for termination of the UGL Kaefer JV and AMWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2013

  1. On 1 February 2022, UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd applied to terminate the UGL Kaefer JV and AMWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement) pursuant to section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

  1. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date of 30 April 2015.

Background

  1. The Agreement covers the Applicant and Kaefer Integrated Services Pty Ltd (Kaefer).

  1. The application was supported by a statutory declaration of  Stephanie Evans, Industrial Relations Advisor, dated 1 February 2022. Ms Evans declares that there are no employees currently covered by the Agreement and that the Applicant has no intention to engage any employee under the Agreement in the future.

  1. Kaefer supports the application to terminate the Agreement.

  1. The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) is covered by the Agreement and advised the Commission on 10 February 2022 that it does not contest the application to terminate the Agreement.

Consideration

  1. In relation to s.225 of the Act, I am satisfied that the Applicant is entitled to make this application and that the Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date.

  2. In relation to s.226, I am required to terminate the Agreement if (a) I am satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so, and (b) if I consider it appropriate taking into account all the circumstances including:

(i)the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and

(ii)the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.

  1. In considering the material filed by the Applicant, I am satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to terminate the Agreement. As outlined above, the views of the AMWU and Kaefer were sought and they do not object to the termination of the Agreement. Ms Evans’ declaration attests that there are no employees covered by the Agreement and as such the termination would have no effect on any employees covered by the Agreement. The Applicant does not intend to engage any employees under the Agreement in the future. The Agreement nominally expired over 6 years ago and its termination would benefit the Applicant and Kaefer by eliminating the need to monitor and administer a historical agreement. This weighs in favour of the termination of the Agreement.

  1. I am satisfied that the requirements of s.226 of the Act have been met, and in all the circumstances, I consider that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.

  1. The Agreement is terminated effective from today.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE403591  PR738300>

Details
AGLC
UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd [2022] FWCA 477
Case
[2022] FWCA 477
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the recent case, UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd applied for the termination of the UGL Kaefer Joint Venture and AMWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was brought under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute arose out of changes in the business model of UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd, which led to concerns about the continued applicability of the enterprise agreement. The Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) intervened in support of the application, arguing that the agreement should be terminated due to significant changes in the operations of UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the enterprise agreement was no longer applicable due to substantial changes in the nature of the work performed by the employees and whether the application met the requirements of section 242 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The court had to consider whether the changes were significant enough to warrant termination of the enterprise agreement and if the application was lodged within the appropriate timeframe and in accordance with the prescribed procedural requirements.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the evidence and submissions, found that there had been substantial changes in the nature of the work performed by the employees of UGL Operations and Maintenance Pty Ltd. These changes included the cessation of certain types of work and the introduction of new types of work that were not contemplated under the existing enterprise agreement. The Commission concluded that these changes were significant enough to warrant the termination of the enterprise agreement. The application was also found to be compliant with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. Consequently, the Fair Work Commission terminated the UGL Kaefer Joint Venture and AMWU Onshore Mechanical Maintenance Services Enterprise Agreement 2013 with effect from 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.