EBA prerequisites met without legislative wording

Cases

EBA prerequisites met without legislative wording

If the clear message of the Federal Workplace Relations Act 1996 in relation to enterprise bargaining prerequisites is conveyed then the use of words, other than those used in the legislation, is permissible

WantToReadMore

Get unlimited access to all of our content.


 
Key point: If the clear message of the FederalWorkplace Relations Act 1996in relation to enterprise bargaining prerequisites is conveyed then the use of words, other than those used in the legislation, is permissible.
 
Detail: Notice of the right to union representation is a critical step in the federal EBA process.

The notice provisions in s170LK(4) of the Act states that:

'(4) The notice must also state that if: (a) any person whose employment will be subject to the agreement is a member of an organisation of employees; and (b) the organisation is entitled to represent the person's industrial interests in relation to work that will be subject to the agreement; the person may request the organisation to represent the person in meeting and conferring with the employer about the agreement.'

The Notice issued by the employer under s170LK(2) of the Act stated the following:

'TO ALL STAFF

'Please note that current Enterprise Bargaining Agreement "AGREEMENT 2000" is due to expire on 31st December 2003.

'Negotiations are now commencing in order to have (sic) new agreement (covering period 2004-2005) in place prior to that date.

'You may request assistance or attendance of a union representative if you require it.'

The AIRC found that the legislative requirements had been met.

See: Joe White Maltings, Redbank, Brisbane Agreement 2004 (3 March 2004) - AIRC - Richards C.

Related

AIRC spells out requirements for company struggling with EB compliance

 

  

Post details