Employment Law – Background
A poorly drafted enterprise agreement has been criticised by the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The case was brought by the Electrical Trades Union (ETU) and the Communications Union (CEPU) against electrical contractor Kentz Pty Ltd (Kentz) in dispute of a clause requiring the purchase of particular income protection products.
The case was initially heard in February this year when Commissioner Michelle Bissett found “no ambiguity” in the wording of the contractual requirement to purchase income protection insurance. However, an appeal was permitted by the Commission because the decision was “attended with sufficient doubt” to permit a rehearing. The full bench of the FWC reaffirmed the earlier decision. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of clear drafting of enterprise agreements in employment law.
Employment Law – Facts
- the ETU and Kentz entered into an enterprise ‘pattern agreement’ typically used in the electrical and communications industries
- additionally, the agreement provided for Kentz to purchase default income protection products with the listed industry super provider