Under Section 186 (6) of the Fair Work Act, FWA must be satisfied before agreeing to an enterprise agreement that contains a term that “requires or authorizes” FWA or any other independent decision-maker to settle “disputes” concerning matters arising from the agreement or the NES. Full Bench rejected the AMWU`s assertion that Section 738 of the FW Act, which deals with the Commission`s jurisdiction over dispute resolution in enterprise agreements, com enters into a non-operative agreement. The Full Bench also noted that: the employer asks workers to draft enterprise agreements (by vote) The question of whether this power will continue if an agreement ceases to apply to a given employee (i.e. because the agreement is terminated or replaced by a new enterprise agreement) has been the subject of different and contradictory authorities of the FWC and its predecessor. Unless it is included in an employment contract, enterprise agreement or other written agreement allowing the Fair Work Commission to deal with the dispute. At trial, Vice-President Barclay noted that the FWC retains the power to deal with a dispute resolution procedure in a dispute resolution procedure contained in the 2014 agreement, after considering a number of relevant decisions: effective dispute resolution can help employers maintain good relations with their employees by addressing employment issues at an early stage. Workers are likely to be more cooperative and productive if they know that their complaints are taken seriously by the employer and that there is an independent party to help resolve the dispute if it cannot be resolved in the workplace. A good dispute resolution process, focused on an effective solution in the workplace, can help avoid the cost of external damage resolution; (z.B. by arbitration proceedings before the Fair Work Commission or by litigation in the Federal Court of Australia. Woolworths sought leave to appeal the decision (which was made), as the Fair Work Act (6) did not require the parties to include a clause in an enterprise agreement providing for arbitration proceedings. On the contrary, the parties were able to agree on the dispute resolution procedure.
The underlying dispute concerned the refusal of the food company Simplot Australia Pty Ltd (Simplot) to convert two casual workers to permanent positions in accordance with the 2014 Enterprise Agreement (2014 agreement). Dispute settlement and business agreements under the Fair Work Act of 2009 Simplot challenged the FWC`s jurisdiction to hear a dispute under the 2014 agreement, which ceased operations. The Commission asked the applicant to commit to settling these issues in the dispute resolution process. After the applicant made the commitments and consulted with the union, the agreement was approved.