| [2015] FWCA 7224 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Weathertex Pty Limited
(AG2015/5806)
WEATHERTEX RAYMOND TERRACE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015- 2018
Manufacturing and associated industries | |
COMMISSIONER ROE | MELBOURNE, 22 OCTOBER 2015 |
Application for approval of the Weathertex Raymond Terrace Enterprise Agreement 2015- 2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Weathertex Raymond Terrace Enterprise Agreement 2015- 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Weathertex Pty Limited. 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. 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.
[3] The Australian Workers’ Union, the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) and the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.
[4] The Agreement was approved on 22 October 2015 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 29 October 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2018.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE416259 PR573112>
- AGLC
- Weathertex Pty Limited [2015] FWCA 7224
- Case
- [2015] FWCA 7224
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 and if it provided for minimum entitlements as mandated by the Fair Work Act. The Health Services Union argued that the agreement did not adequately protect employees' interests, particularly in the areas of shift patterns, leave accrual, and redundancy provisions.
The Commission examined the agreement's provisions against the legislative benchmarks, finding that while the proposed agreement largely adhered to the statutory minimums, certain aspects required adjustment to ensure compliance. Specifically, the Commission noted that the agreement needed to be more explicit in its provisions concerning shift patterns and leave accrual to avoid confusion and potential underpayment. Regarding redundancy, the Commission concluded that the proposed terms were in line with the legislative requirements. Following these findings, the Commission directed the parties to amend specific clauses and, upon satisfactory revisions, approved the agreement with the modifications.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.