DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd
(AG2016/3981)

WIELAND CONCRETING PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 12 OCTOBER 2016

Application for approval of the Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd 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 Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 October 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 18 October 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd and its employees, with the matter being heard in the Fair Work Commission of Australia. The dispute centred around the application for approval of the Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2015. The employees, represented by a union, contested the terms of the agreement, arguing it did not sufficiently protect their rights and interests. The company, on the other hand, argued that the agreement was fair and in line with industry standards.

The legal issues before the court were whether the agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically focusing on whether it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, and whether it was genuinely agreed upon by the parties involved. The court had to consider the balance of power between the employer and employees, and whether the agreement had been made without any coercion or undue influence. Additionally, the court examined whether the agreement included provisions that were outside the scope of permissible matters, and if the terms were consistent with the broader public policy objectives of the Fair Work Act.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission determined that the agreement did not meet the necessary standards for approval. The court found that several provisions of the agreement were not fair and reasonable, particularly those relating to overtime and penalty rates. The commission noted that the agreement did not adequately address the employees' concerns regarding these issues, which were significant to the workforce. Furthermore, the commission concluded that the agreement had not been genuinely negotiated and agreed upon by both parties, as required by law. Consequently, the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was dismissed.

As a result of the court's decision, the Wieland Concreting Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2015 was not approved. The employees' union was directed to recommence negotiations with the company to address the concerns raised by the commission. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring fair and reasonable terms in enterprise agreements, and highlighted the need for genuine agreement between employers and employees to achieve this objective.

Wieland Concreting 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