DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood
(AG2019/1787)

WOOD ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENT AGREEMENT LYTTON REFINERY 2019-2022

Electrical contracting industry
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 12 JUNE 2019

Application for approval of the Wood Electrical and Instrument Agreement Lytton Refinery 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Wood Electrical and Instrument Agreement Lytton Refinery 2019-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). It has been made by Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood. 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 Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) 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 19 June 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 March 2022.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission concerned an application by Wood Australia Pty Ltd trading as Wood, for approval of the Wood Electrical and Instrument Agreement Lytton Refinery 2019-2022. The application was made under the Fair Work Act 2009, and the parties involved were Wood Australia and the Electrical Industries Union of Australia. The dispute arose from the negotiation process of the agreement, with the union contending that certain provisions did not adequately address key issues impacting the workforce.

The central legal issues before the Commission involved the fairness and adequacy of the proposed agreement, particularly concerning the union's claims that the terms did not sufficiently protect the employees' interests. The union argued that several provisions fell short of industry standards and did not adequately address overtime, shift penalties, and the overall remuneration package. The Commission needed to determine whether the proposed agreement complied with the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act, including whether it promoted higher wages and better conditions for the employees.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission examined the provisions of the agreement in detail, weighing the submissions from both parties. The Commission found that while some provisions did not meet the union's expectations, they were not so deficient as to render the agreement unfair. The Commission highlighted that the agreement included provisions that aligned with industry benchmarks and provided for improvements in wages and conditions. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, concluding that it met the legislative criteria and was in the best interests of the employees. The union's application to vary the agreement was dismissed.

Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established