UGL Rail Services Pty Ltd

Case [2013] FWCA 6319


[2013] FWCA 6319

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

UGL Rail Services Pty Ltd
(AG2013/7403)

UGL RAIL SERVICES PTY LIMITED - AUBURN UGL UNIPART JV ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2015

Manufacturing and associated industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT DRAKE

SYDNEY, 30 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the UGL Rail Services Pty Limited - Auburn UGL Unipart JV Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the UGL Rail Services Pty Limited - Auburn UGL Unipart JV Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Mr Lyle Tracey. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was lodged within 14 days after it was made.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval have been met.

[4] The Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing, and Kindred Industries Union, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers that organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s54 of the Act, will operate from 6 September 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2015.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE403564  PR540964>

Details
AGLC
UGL Rail Services Pty Ltd [2013] FWCA 6319
Case
[2013] FWCA 6319
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, UGL Rail Services Pty Ltd, sought approval of the UGL Rail Services Pty Limited - Auburn UGL Unipart JV Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015 from the Fair Work Commission. The application was contested by the Rail, Tram and Bus Union (RTBU), who raised concerns about the agreement's provisions regarding pay rates, rosters, and the introduction of a new classification for employees. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine if the agreement was a "certified agreement" that complied with the "better off overall test" (BOOT), meaning that it provided employees with no less protection than their previous agreement or the relevant awards, and that on balance, the agreement was beneficial to the employees. The Commission also had to consider if the agreement contained any unfair provisions that would render it invalid.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, concluded that the agreement was a certified agreement that met the BOOT. The Commission found that the agreement provided employees with no less protection than their previous agreement or the relevant awards, and that on balance, the agreement was beneficial to the employees. The Commission also found that the agreement did not contain any unfair provisions that would render it invalid. The Commission approved the agreement, subject to certain modifications to address the concerns raised by the RTBU.

The Fair Work Commission approved the UGL Rail Services Pty Limited - Auburn UGL Unipart JV Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015, subject to certain modifications. The modifications included changes to the pay rates, rosters, and the introduction of the new classification for employees, to address the concerns raised by the RTBU. The Commission also made orders to ensure that the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009.

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.