DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Urson Contracting Pty Ltd
(AG2016/3527)

URSON CONTRACTING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Agricultural industry
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 18 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the Urson Contracting Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Urson Contracting 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 Urson Contracting Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 18 July 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 25 July 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 18 July 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Urson Contracting Pty Ltd sought approval of an enterprise agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Fair Work Commission heard the matter and was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements for approval as a single-interest employer enterprise agreement. The application was made by Urson Contracting, and the respondents included various employees and unions who raised concerns about specific clauses within the agreement.

The key legal issues centred on whether the agreement was genuinely a single-interest employer agreement, as required by section 175 of the Fair Work Act. The respondents argued that the agreement did not meet the criteria for a single-interest employer agreement because it included terms that affected employees beyond those directly employed by Urson Contracting. This included provisions that impacted employees of subcontractors. The Commission needed to assess if the agreement was limited to terms that related directly to the employees of Urson Contracting.

In considering the arguments, the Fair Work Commission found that the agreement was genuinely a single-interest employer agreement. The Commission held that the provisions concerning subcontractor employees were incidental and did not extend beyond what was necessary to ensure the agreement's effectiveness for Urson Contracting’s employees. The Commission concluded that the agreement met the requirements for approval, emphasising that the provisions in question were integral to maintaining fair and effective workplace relations for Urson Contracting's employees. The application was thus approved, and the agreement was registered.

No additional orders were made beyond the approval and registration of the enterprise agreement as submitted by Urson Contracting.

Urson Contracting Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established