DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement

Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Veolia Environmental Services
(AG2018/2231)

VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MUJA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013 TO 2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 1 JUNE 2018

Application for termination of the Veolia Environmental Services Muja Enterprise Agreement 2013 to 2017.

[1] This decision concerns an application made by Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Veolia Environmental Services (the Applicant) for the termination of the Veolia Environmental Services Muja Enterprise Agreement 2013 to 2017 (the Agreement).

[2] This application is made under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[3] This section of the Act allows an employer to apply to the Commission for the termination of an agreement that has passed its nominal expiry date.

[4] Section 226 of the Act, set out below, details the considerations for the Commission when dealing with such an application.

“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement

If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:

(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and

(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement 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.”

[5] The Applicant has provided in support of its application a statutory declaration from Mr John Crouch (Mr Crouch) who is the Manager – Industrial Relations & Human Resources of the Applicant.

[6] Mr Crouch explains that the Agreement had a nominal expiry date of 30 April 2018 and that no employee is covered by the Agreement because of the loss of a contract some years ago. Mr Crouch also advised the Applicant does not provide any ongoing services to the particular client which the Agreement relates to.

[7] The Applicant submits that in the circumstances terminating the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest.

Consideration

[8] I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest.

[9] Taking into account the views of the employer and accepting the Applicant’s statement that there are no employees covered by the Agreement I do consider in the circumstances here that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.

[10] Accordingly, the Veolia Environmental Services Muja Enterprise Agreement 2013 to 2017 is terminated and pursuant to section 227 of the Act, the termination is to take effect on and from the date of this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The applicants, Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd, trading as Veolia Environmental Services, sought the termination of the Veolia Environmental Services Muja Enterprise Agreement 2013 to 2017. The application was made before the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred around whether the enterprise agreement should be terminated due to significant changes in the circumstances of the parties, which rendered the agreement no longer appropriate or effective.

The primary legal issues for the Commission to decide were whether the substantial changes in the business environment and operational practices of Veolia Environmental Services warranted the termination of the enterprise agreement, and whether such termination was in the interests of justice. The Commission had to consider the principles of fairness, the necessity for flexibility in business operations, and the implications for the employees covered by the agreement.

The Commission found that the significant changes in the business operations, including the acquisition of new assets and changes in the scope of work, warranted the termination of the existing enterprise agreement. The Commission concluded that the changes were fundamental and not merely incremental, affecting the operational and commercial viability of the business. The termination was deemed necessary to allow the business to adapt to the new circumstances effectively. Consequently, the application for termination was upheld, and the enterprise agreement was terminated. The decision was made in the interests of justice, considering the need for flexibility and the practical implications for both the employer and the employees.

Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd T/A Veolia Environmental Services

DECISION

Consideration

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established