Viscount Plastics (Australia) Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 3073

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Viscount Plastics (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/6371)

VISCOUNT PLASTICS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD, MINTO SITE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER CARGILL	SYDNEY, 20 MAY 2013

Application for approval of the Viscount Plastics (Australia) Pty Ltd, Minto Site Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Viscount Plastics (Australia) Pty Ltd, Minto Site Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Viscount Plastics (Australia) Pty Ltd. 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 “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), and United Voice - New South Wales Branch, each being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, have 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 each organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 May 2013. The nominal expiry date is 31 March 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Viscount Plastics (Australia) Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of their Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was opposed by the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union. The Fair Work Commission was required to determine whether the agreement met the legal requirements for approval, specifically under section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved assessing the agreement against criteria such as whether it facilitated the efficient operation of the enterprise and promoted harmonious, productive and cooperative workplace relations.

The primary issue was whether the Enterprise Agreement 2013 provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including whether it met the "better off overall test." This test required the Commission to determine if the employees would be better off overall under the agreement than they would be under the applicable award or safety net minimum terms and conditions. The Court also needed to consider whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it facilitated the efficient operation of the enterprise.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the Enterprise Agreement 2013 did not meet the "better off overall test." The Commission noted that while some employees would benefit from higher wages and reduced working hours, the overall effect of the agreement was detrimental to the majority of employees. The Commission also found that the agreement had not been made in good faith, as it contained provisions that were not genuinely intended to improve workplace relations. Consequently, the Commission refused to approve the Enterprise Agreement 2013.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established