Yelland Pty Ltd T/A ACP Hardstand Solutions Summary

[2014] FWCA 276

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Yelland Pty Ltd T/A ACP Hardstand Solutions
(AG2013/11501)

ACP HARDSTAND SOLUTIONS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 10 JANUARY 2014

Application for approval of the ACP Hardstand Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the ACP Hardstand Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Yelland 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] 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.

[5] 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.

[6] The Agreement was approved on 10 January 2014 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 17 January 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Yelland Pty Ltd T/A ACP Hardstand Solutions, the Fair Work Commission was called upon to approve an enterprise agreement between the company and its employees. The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement met the necessary standards and provisions under the Fair Work Act 2009. The legal issues that needed to be resolved included the fairness of the agreement, its compliance with relevant minimum terms, and whether it adequately protected the interests of the employees.

The court had to assess the fairness of the proposed agreement by considering if it was negotiated in good faith, and whether it provided a safety net of minimum terms and conditions of employment. Additionally, the court needed to ensure that the agreement did not undermine the protection afforded by the National Employment Standards and other safety net provisions. The court also examined whether the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to public policy or that penalised employees for exercising their rights.

In its reasoning, the Fair Work Commission determined that the enterprise agreement was fair and reasonable. The court found that the agreement was negotiated in good faith and provided adequate minimum terms and conditions of employment. It concluded that the agreement did not undermine the protection afforded by the National Employment Standards or other safety net provisions. The court also found that the agreement did not contain any provisions that were contrary to public policy or that penalised employees for exercising their rights. Consequently, the Commission approved the ACP Hardstand Solutions Enterprise Agreement 2013.

The final orders of the court included the approval of the enterprise agreement, subject to certain conditions and clarifications that were necessary to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The court ordered that the agreement be registered with the Fair Work Commission and that it would take effect from a specified date. This decision provided clarity and certainty for both the employer and the employees regarding the terms and conditions of their employment.

Yelland Pty Ltd T/A ACP Hardstand Solutions

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established