DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd t/a UPM Raflatac
(AG2016/961)

UPM RAFLATAC PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Graphic Arts
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 26 MAY 2016

Application for approval of the UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd t/a UPM Raflatac. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, 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 application was not lodged within 14 days after the agreement was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b), in all the circumstances I consider it fair to extend the time for making the application to the date it was actually made.

[4] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) 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) and based on the statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 26 May 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 2 June 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 March 2019.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd, trading as UPM Raflatac, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016. The application was contested by the Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union and the Transport Officers' Union. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment of the employees covered by the proposed enterprise agreement.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement provided for the mandatory matters, was free from prohibited content, and complied with procedural requirements. The mandatory matters include minimum rates of pay, overtime, penalty rates, maximum weekly hours, leave provisions, and the right to request flexible working arrangements. Prohibited content can include terms that are contrary to public policy, terms that undermine the operation of the safety net of entitlements, and other terms that are not in the best interests of the employees.

The Commission found that the agreement satisfied all the requirements. The agreement provided for the mandatory matters in compliance with the applicable industrial laws. It did not contain any prohibited content. The agreement was also procedurally sound as it had been negotiated in good faith and the necessary steps were taken to inform and consult with the employees. The application was therefore approved.

The Fair Work Commission approved the UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016, finding that it met all the legal requirements. The agreement provides for the mandatory matters, is free from prohibited content, and was negotiated and executed in compliance with the procedural requirements. The decision is a useful guide for employers and unions when negotiating and finalising enterprise agreements.

UPM Raflatac Pty Ltd t/a UPM Raflatac

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established