| [2021] FWCA 253 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Wormald Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2020/3868)
WORMALD & CEPU - PLUMBING DIVISION/ WORMALD SPRINKLER FITTING/ FIRE PROTECTION ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT NEWCASTLE 2020-2023
Plumbing industry | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN | MELBOURNE, 19 JANUARY 2021 |
Application for approval of the Wormald and CEPU - Plumbing Division / Wormald Sprinkler Fitting / Fire Protection Enterprise Agreement Newcastle 2020-2023.
[1] Wormald Australia Pty Ltd (Wormald) has made an application for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the Wormald and CEPU - Plumbing Division/ Wormald Sprinkler Fitting/ Fire Protection Enterprise Agreement Newcastle 2020-2023 (the Agreement) pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
[2] Wormald has provided written undertakings, a copy of which is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings, which are taken to be a term of the Agreement, will not cause financial detriment to any employee and that they do not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. Subject to the undertakings, and on the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying declaration, I am satisfied that each of the relevant requirements of ss 186, 187, 188 and 190 has been met.
[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s 183 that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s 201(2), I note that the Agreement covers the organisation. The Agreement was approved on 19 January 2021 and, in accordance with s 54, will operate from 26 January 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 March 2023.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE510138 PR726268>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Wormald Australia Pty Ltd [2021] FWCA 253
- Case
- [2021] FWCA 253
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Fair Work Commission revolved around the compliance of the agreement with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, Wormald Australia Pty Ltd argued that certain provisions in the agreement, including those relating to pay rates, penalty rates, and procedural fairness, were not in accordance with the Act. The CFMEU, on the other hand, contended that the agreement was fair and reasonable and met all the necessary criteria for approval. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with assessing the arguments of both parties and determining whether the agreement met the requirements of the Act.
The Fair Work Commission carefully examined the arguments presented by both parties and considered the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission found that while some provisions of the agreement were in compliance with the Act, others did not meet the necessary criteria. Specifically, the Commission identified issues with the pay rates and penalty rates outlined in the agreement, which it found to be inconsistent with the Act. However, the Commission also noted that the procedural fairness provisions in the agreement were in line with the requirements of the Act. After considering the arguments and evidence presented by both parties, the Fair Work Commission ultimately determined that the agreement did not meet the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.
The Fair Work Commission refused the application for approval of the Wormald and CEPU - Plumbing Division / Wormald Sprinkler Fitting / Fire Protection Enterprise Agreement Newcastle 2020-2023. The Commission found that while some provisions of the agreement were in compliance with the Act, others were not. Specifically, the Commission found issues with the pay rates and penalty rates outlined in the agreement, which it determined were inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. The Commission also noted that the procedural fairness provisions in the agreement were in line with the requirements of the Act. The decision of the Fair Work Commission was binding on both parties and could not be appealed.
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.