DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Wormald Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wormald
(AG2018/5641)

WORMALD SYDNEY PASSIVE DIVISION ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 20 MARCH 2019

Application for approval of the Wormald Sydney Passive Division Enterprise Agreement.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Wormald Sydney Passive Division Enterprise Agreement (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Wormald Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wormald. 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] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 27 March 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 November 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Wormald Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Wormald, sought approval of the Wormald Sydney Passive Division Enterprise Agreement through the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the criteria for being a "low paid" enterprise agreement, which would allow it to proceed without a vote. The Fair Work Commission was the tribunal tasked with making this determination.

The primary legal issue was whether the agreement could be classified as a low paid agreement. This classification would exempt it from the requirement for a majority of employees to vote in favour of the agreement. The determination hinged on the average hourly rate of the employees covered by the agreement and whether it met the specified threshold. The Commission had to consider the evidence presented on the average hourly rate of the employees and whether the agreement met the necessary criteria.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence provided and concluded that the agreement did indeed meet the criteria for a low paid agreement. The average hourly rate of the employees was found to be below the threshold required for the agreement to be classified as anything other than low paid. Given this finding, the agreement did not need to be voted on by the employees to proceed. The Commission approved the agreement based on this determination.

The Fair Work Commission approved the agreement, finding it to be a low paid agreement and thus exempt from the requirement for employee voting. This decision was based on the evidence presented regarding the average hourly rate of the employees and the specific criteria for a low paid agreement.

Wormald Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wormald

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established