Viterra Limited

[2013] FWCA 8272

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Viterra Limited
(AG2013/2925)

VITERRA DOOEN AGREEMENT 2013

Storage services
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 22 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the Viterra Dooen Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Viterra Dooen Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Viterra Limited (the Applicant). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I was initially concerned with some aspects of the proposed Agreement and wrote to the company outlining those issues on 1 October 2013. On 18 October 2013 I received a signed undertaking in response to the queries from Ben Norman, HR Director. This undertaking now forms part of the Agreement and is kept on the file. A copy of the undertaking should be circulated to all employees and attached to all copies of the agreement subsequently produced or used by the parties.

[3] The undertaking which now forms part of the Agreement is attached.

[4] I am satisfied that the effect of the undertaking is not likely to cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement; or result in substantial changes to the Agreement. Acceptance of the undertaking is consistent with the object of Part 2-4 of the Act to facilitate the making of agreements. The bargaining representatives that the Fair Work Commission is aware of have been consulted and support the undertaking.

[5] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer however taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[6] The Australian Workers’ Union has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 29 October 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Viterra Limited recently appeared before the Fair Work Commission to seek approval for the Viterra Dooen Agreement 2013. Viterra, an agricultural commodities business, sought to implement a new enterprise agreement which would affect its employees. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment proposed in the agreement, and whether it complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary standards for approval, particularly in relation to the fairness and reasonableness of its provisions.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided for appropriate minimum rates of pay and conditions, and whether it complied with the "better off overall test." This test requires that employees be no worse off financially under the new agreement than they would be under their existing conditions. Additionally, the Commission considered whether the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of both the employer and the employees, and whether it adhered to the principles of procedural fairness. The Commission also examined whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether there was sufficient consultation with the employees.

The Commission carefully reviewed the evidence and submissions from both Viterra and the employees' representatives. It found that the proposed agreement did indeed provide for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including appropriate minimum rates of pay. The Commission determined that the agreement met the better off overall test, as employees would not be worse off financially. Furthermore, the Commission was satisfied that the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of both parties and adhered to the principles of procedural fairness. It also found that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated and that there had been sufficient consultation with the employees. Based on these findings, the Commission approved the Viterra Dooen Agreement 2013.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established