Beyond Blue Enterprise Agreement

4.28 The termination of the contract not only imposed the industry price on Griffin Coal`s maintenance employees – the statutory minimum wage and legal conditions – but also lowered the bargaining floor and strengthened the power imbalance between employers and employees. 4.41 At the Committee`s request, Griffin Coal`s Chief Operating Officer, Terry Gray, confirmed that only maintenance workers had terminated their agreement and that wages and conditions had been reduced. At the time of the public hearing, there was no request to terminate the operating contract that had expired in nominal terms and the administrative staff had not reduced salaries. [30] 4.57 One case, which made headlines across the country, was brought to an end in August 2016 by Esso Australia, a company that requested economic policy agreements on its oil and gas and offshore activities, after lengthy negotiations with workers and the unions that represent them, the Australian Workers Union (AWU) Union of Electrical Trades (ETU) and AMWU. 4.39 According to the AMWU, Griffin Coal did not deviate from this position during or after the termination of the contract: 4.56 With the threat of termination, the parties finally reached a mutually acceptable agreement through the continuation of negotiations. 4.71 It is also interesting to note that the termination did not prevent Griffin Coal`s continued financial decline. [58] With the fact that the denunciation of the agreement has undermined the negotiation process and had devastating effects on workers, their families and the small collie community, the “public interest” remains an obscure excuse. Maintenance workers were aware of Griffins` insularity in reversing their business losses and therefore proposed a pay cut of about 15% at the same time as a four-year wage freeze. This offer was clearly not enough for Griffin Coal, since it fixed its negotiating position on a point so low that a new agreement was inaccessible for… In his decision, Commissioner Danny Cloughan said that [the agreement was denounced] to help both sides reach a new agreement. To this extent, its decision did not achieve the desired result and put enormous pressure on the employees and their families, both financially and mentally. 4.6 In the latter case, a request to terminate the agreement may be made to the FWC if the nominal expiry date has expired and the agreements have been repealed. Applications may be submitted unilaterally by an employer, worker or workers` organization covered by the agreement.

However, the decision to terminate a contract rests with the FWC. [2] 4.61 This case had a significantly different result than Griffin Coal. In response to the company`s request to terminate its contracts, the unions informed the company that 600 workers would be on strike, which could affect gas deliveries to Victoria, New South Wales and Tasmania. 4.11 The Aurizon case took place in 2015. The company had been privatized, but current employees were protected by the provisions of their enterprise agreement during negotiations on a new agreement. Instead of negotiating, the company asked for the termination of its contracts. [7] 4.63 Employers quickly report that the application for a termination contract is fully compliant with the law. For example, Griffin Coal submitted: Start with our search for documents and try a full text search for agreements. One Key`s decision concerned the RECS (Qld) Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2015 (One Key Workforce (OKW), known as RECS (Qld) Pty Ltd at the time of the contract.

Comments are closed.