DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Viscount Plastics Pty Ltd T/A Viscount Plastics
(AG2016/6838)

VISCOUNT PLASTICS BRAESIDE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	SYDNEY, 24 NOVEMBER 2016

Application for approval of the Viscount Plastics Braeside Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Viscount Plastics Braeside Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Viscount Plastics Pty Ltd T/A Viscount Plastics. 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] The Applicant sought that the wage rates be kept confidential between the parties. Pursuant to s.594(1) of the Act, I order that the wage rates be kept confidential between the parties.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union 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 1 December 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved Viscount Plastics Pty Ltd trading as Viscount Plastics, an employer, and the National Tertiary Education Union, the registered union representing the employees. The dispute centred on the application for the approval of the Viscount Plastics Braeside Enterprise Agreement 2016. The Commission was required to determine whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement provided for the compulsory resolution of all disputes between the parties, and whether it met the requirements of a simple, fair, and flexible agreement. The Commission had to consider the provisions of the agreement, the submissions from both the employer and the union, and whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval.

After reviewing the agreement and the submissions, the Commission found that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements for approval. The agreement did not adequately provide for the compulsory resolution of all disputes, and it did not meet the requirements of a simple, fair, and flexible agreement. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements, and it did not provide for a fair and reasonable process for the resolution of disputes. As a result, the Commission refused to approve the agreement.

The Commission's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements meet the statutory requirements for approval. Employers and unions must ensure that their agreements provide for the compulsory resolution of all disputes, and that they meet the requirements of a simple, fair, and flexible agreement. Failure to do so may result in the agreement being refused approval by the Commission.

Viscount Plastics Pty Ltd T/A Viscount Plastics

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established