DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Vinpac International Pty Ltd
(AG2016/3822)

VINPAC INTERNATIONAL MCLAREN VALE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Wine industry
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 23 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the Vinpac International McLaren Vale Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Vinpac International McLaren Vale Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Vinpac International Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] 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] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] United Voice 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 30 August 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vinpac International Pty Ltd was involved in a dispute with its employees, represented by the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Association, regarding the approval of the Vinpac International McLaren Vale Enterprise Agreement 2015. The matter was brought before the Fair Work Commission, where the primary concern was whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The employees argued that the agreement failed to meet certain conditions, including adequate provisions for employee protection and procedural fairness.

The central legal issues revolved around whether the enterprise agreement contained appropriate mechanisms for dispute resolution, minimum entitlements for employees, and procedural fairness in its creation. The Commission had to examine whether the agreement adhered to the relevant legislative provisions, particularly focusing on the need for fair and just terms and conditions for employees. It was also crucial to determine if the agreement had been genuinely negotiated between the parties and if it provided sufficient protection for employees’ rights.

The Fair Work Commission examined the agreement clause by clause, considering the arguments presented by both parties. It concluded that while the agreement contained provisions for dispute resolution and minimum entitlements, certain clauses fell short of the statutory requirements. The Commission found that the agreement did not adequately address procedural fairness in the negotiation process, and some terms did not provide sufficient protection for employees. Consequently, the Commission did not approve the enterprise agreement. The Commission ordered that the agreement be returned to the parties for further negotiation and amendment to meet the legal standards required by the Fair Work Act 2009.

Vinpac International 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