DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Wilson Security Pty Ltd
(AG2015/3818)

UNITED VOICE AND WILSON SECURITY VICTORIA SAFEGUARD AGREEMENT 2014

Security services
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 16 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the United Voice and Wilson Security Victoria Safeguard Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the United Voice and Wilson Security Victoria Safeguard Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Wilson Security Pty Ltd. 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] United Voice, 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.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 23 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

In the matter of Wilson Security Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was asked to approve a safeguard agreement between United Voice and Wilson Security Victoria. The agreement aimed to provide a framework for the management of employees transitioning from Wilson Security to Secure Asset Management (SAM), a subsidiary of United Voice. The dispute centred on whether the proposed terms of the safeguard agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission needed to determine if the agreement provided adequate protections for the employees and if it was fair and reasonable in all the circumstances.

The primary legal issues involved assessing whether the safeguard agreement met the statutory criteria for approval. These criteria included whether the agreement provided for the fair treatment of employees, whether it allowed for adequate consultation and negotiation, and whether it complied with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. The Commission also had to consider the balance between the interests of the employees and the legitimate operational needs of the employer. Furthermore, the Commission needed to ensure that the agreement did not contravene any other relevant laws or regulations.

The Fair Work Commission found that the safeguard agreement, while generally comprehensive, required some modifications to fully meet the statutory criteria. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement provided for the fair treatment of employees and allowed for adequate consultation. However, certain procedural aspects needed to be clarified to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act. The Commission also considered the impact of the agreement on the employees' rights and the need to protect their interests during the transition period. Ultimately, the Commission determined that the proposed agreement, with certain modifications, was fair and reasonable and should be approved. The Commission made specific orders to amend particular clauses to address its concerns and ensure compliance with the law.

The final orders included approval of the safeguard agreement, subject to the modifications identified by the Commission. The Commission mandated that certain clauses be revised to ensure clarity and compliance with the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the parties were required to provide updated documentation reflecting the agreed changes. The Commission's decision ensured that the employees' rights and interests were adequately protected while allowing for a smooth transition under the new ownership.

Wilson Security 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