Publication
Road to COP29: Our insights
The 28th Conference of the Parties on Climate Change (COP28) took place on November 30 - December 12 in Dubai.
Australia | Publication | November 2023
This article was co-authored by Terry Stavrianos.
In our previous article, we explored the introduction of sunsetting provisions for what are commonly referred to as ‘zombie agreements’. Broadly, zombie agreements are workplace agreements made before the commencement of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) and during the transitional period immediately prior to its full implementation.
As part of the amendments introduced by the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Act 2022 (Cth) (Secure Jobs Amendments), all zombie agreements are set to automatically terminate on 7 December 2023 unless the Fair Work Commission (FWC) approves their extension.
As the sun sets on zombie agreements, a series of recent decisions delivered by the Full Bench of the FWC provide some guidance on what is required to ensure the successful extension of a zombie agreement.
In this article, we will examine the Full Bench’s recent decision in Application by Peter Michael Frick [2023] FWCFB 137 (Frick), which helpfully reinforces the approach taken by the FWC to date, and clarifies a number of key considerations.
Based on the recent decisions of the FWC Full Bench, it is becoming increasingly clear that these extension applications are not to be used as a vehicle of convenience. Rather, the purpose for an extension is to facilitate the transition to a contemporary arrangement under the FW Act.
The Full Bench considered a union-led application for the extension of three zombie agreements (together, the Agreements), which covered 540 IT workers employed by DXC Enterprise. The application was brought to extend the default period by four years, which is the maximum extension period available under Secure Jobs Amendments. The Australian Services Union and Professionals Australia applied to have the Agreements extended for the maximum period on the basis that the Agreements provided for superior conditions in comparison to the relevant awards.
DXC Enterprise was not the original employer party to any of the Agreements, and became bound by them as a result of multiple transmissions of business.
After notifying employees about the sun-setting of the Agreements, DXC Enterprise provided them with common law contracts for their consideration. Following this, DXC Enterprise held employee ballots to determine whether employees approved of the termination of the Agreements. These ballots were rejected by the majority of affected employees.
The FWC was satisfied that:
In these circumstances, the FWC must (upon application) extend the default period if it is satisfied that it was ‘otherwise appropriate in the circumstances to do so’ or ‘it is reasonable in the circumstances to do so’.
In line with the earlier decision in Application by Suncoast Scaffold Pty Ltd as trustee for The Warren Family Trust [2023] FWCFB 105, the Full Bench reiterated that this consideration required them to make a broad evaluative judgment as to whether it was suitable or fitting to grant the extension with reference to the relevant matters and conditions which accompanied the application.
The Full Bench confirmed in Frick that it was otherwise appropriate in the circumstances to grant the extension, for the following four reasons:
Having determined that it was ‘otherwise appropriate in the circumstances’ to grant the extension, the Full Bench turned to consider the length of the extension.
The Full Bench highlighted that they were not bound to grant the period of extension sought in the applications. In exercising this discretion, the Full Bench will be guided by what they described as a ‘policy preference’ in the legislative scheme for the transition of employees currently covered by zombie agreements to coverage by instruments made under the FW Act.
The Full Bench decided to extend the Agreements by approximately three years from the date of the decision. The Full Bench concluded that this was an appropriate amount of time for the parties to take the steps necessary to negotiate and enter into a new enterprise agreement.
In determining the appropriate length of the extension, the Full Bench was compelled by the following factors:
This decision demonstrates that caution will be applied when considering the appropriate length of an extension period. Zombie agreements will not be extended by the maximum period of four years without cause.
When determining the length of an extension period, the FWC will attempt to balance the following considerations:
Parties considering applying for the extension of a zombie agreement should not view it as a means by which to delay or otherwise circumvent the negotiation of a new arrangement. Rather, such applications should be considered a single step in a broader process towards a new arrangement.
Where there was no evidence of an intention to move to a contemporary industrial instrument, or no plan to facilitate such a transition, the Full Bench has found on multiple occasions that the requested extension was not reasonable in the circumstances.
Publication
The 28th Conference of the Parties on Climate Change (COP28) took place on November 30 - December 12 in Dubai.
Publication
While country risk cannot be avoided in cross-border transactions entirely, it can be effectively mitigated through careful transaction structuring and tailored contractual protections.
Publication
Miranda Cole, Julien Haverals and Emma Clarke of our Brussels/ London offices are the authors of a chapter on procedural issues in merger control that has been published in the third edition of the Global Competition Review’s The Guide to Life Sciences. This covers a number of significant procedural developments that have affected merger review of life sciences transactions.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023