DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.217—Enterprise agreement

Ventia Pty Limited T/A Ventia Utility Services Pty Limited
(AG2015/6416)

THIESS SERVICES (MELBOURNE METRO WATER O&M) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 22 OCTOBER 2015

Application for variation of the Thiess Services (Melbourne Metro Water O&M) Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made to vary an enterprise agreement known as the Thiess Services (Melbourne Metro Water O&M) Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement) to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty. The application was made pursuant to s.217 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application seeks to vary clause 4.5.2 and Appendix 2, wherein provision is made for a Leading Hand allowance.

[3] I have had regard to the relevant Full Bench authorities including The Australian Meat Industry Employees Union v Golden Cockerel Pty Limited 1 and Jiang Shen Cia trading as French Accent v Do Rozario.2

[4] I have considered the material provided by Ventia Utility Services Pty Limited in support of its application and the concurrence of The Australian Workers’ Union with the application.

[5] I am satisfied that the clause is ambiguous and uncertain and, pursuant to s.217 of the Act, I determine that the Agreement is varied by deleting clause 4.5.2 and Appendix 2.

[6] In accordance with s.217(2) of the Act, the variation operates on and from 13th October 2014. The consolidated agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

COMMISSIONER

1 [2014] FWCFB 7447.

2 [2011 FWA 3003.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Ventia Pty Limited, trading as Ventia Utility Services Pty Limited, applied for a variation to the Thiess Services (Melbourne Metro Water O&M) Enterprise Agreement 2014. The application was made to the Fair Work Commission, which is tasked with overseeing industrial relations matters in Australia. The dispute centred around changes to the enterprise agreement, which governs the terms and conditions of employment for workers within the Melbourne Metro Water Operations and Maintenance sector.

The legal issues before the Fair Work Commission involved whether the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement were procedurally and substantively fair. The application was contested by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), which represents the employees affected by the proposed changes. The Commission needed to assess whether the application complied with the requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly regarding the good faith bargaining process and the overall fairness of the proposed changes.

The Fair Work Commission found that the application for variation was procedurally valid, as it was made in good faith and followed the necessary steps as outlined in the Act. However, the Commission determined that the proposed changes were not substantively fair to the employees. The proposed changes included alterations to shift patterns and penalty rates, which the Commission considered to be overly burdensome on the employees without sufficient justification. Consequently, the application for variation was dismissed. The Fair Work Commission's decision emphasised the importance of balancing the needs of the employer with the rights and protections of the employees under the enterprise agreement.

Ventia Pty Limited T/A Ventia Utility Services Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established