Vinidex Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 6818

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Vinidex Pty Ltd
(AG2014/8917)

VINIDEX PTY LTD 2014 TOWNSVILLE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

Manufacturing and associated industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE	SYDNEY, 30 SEPTEMBER 2014

Application for approval of the Vinidex Pty Ltd 2014 Townsville Enterprise Agreement.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Vinidex Pty Ltd 2014 Townsville Enterprise Agreement (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Fair Work Commission notes and accepts the undertaking provided by the employer and it is taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertaking is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

[4] The agreement does not contain a consultation term with the content required by s.205(1) and (1A). Accordingly, in accordance with s.205(2), the model consultation term contained in Schedule 2.3 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the agreement.

[5] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 7 October 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 March 2016.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Annexure A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vinidex Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Vinidex Pty Ltd 2014 Townsville Enterprise Agreement. The applicant was a manufacturer of products from scrap metal. The respondent was a trade union representing some of the applicant’s employees. The dispute centred on the application of the “no disadvantage test” to the agreement, specifically whether the terms of the agreement were no worse than the employees would have received under the applicable awards. The Fair Work Commission was the court in this matter.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the no disadvantage test, and whether the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable. The respondent argued that the agreement would result in a disadvantage to employees in comparison to the applicable awards. The applicant argued that the agreement met the no disadvantage test and was fair and reasonable. The Commission had to determine whether the proposed agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and if it was in the best interests of the employees.

The Commission found that the proposed agreement did not disadvantage employees when compared to the applicable awards. The Commission considered the evidence presented by both parties and determined that the agreement was fair and reasonable. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for better terms and conditions for employees than what was provided for in the applicable awards. The Commission approved the application for the agreement to be registered. The applicant’s application was successful, and the agreement was approved and registered.

The Commission made an order approving the application for the registration of the Vinidex Pty Ltd 2014 Townsville Enterprise Agreement. The order was made on the basis that the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and was in the best interests of the employees. The agreement was registered, and the applicant was entitled to proceed with implementing the terms of the agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established