Application by Maskill Pty Ltd Trading AS Maskill
Citation: [2026] FWCA 1688
What happened
Maskill Pty Ltd, a company in the manufacturing industry, sought approval for its Maskill Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2026. The application was made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009. A minor technical error occurred with the Notice of Employee Representational Rights form. Clause 5.2 of the agreement addresses potential inconsistencies with the National Employment Standards.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission approved the Maskill Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2026. The Deputy President found a minor technical error in the employee representation notice did not disadvantage employees. A delegates’ rights term was deemed to be met through clause 40A of the Manufacturing and Associated Industries and Occupations Award 2020. Entitlements under the National Employment Standards will prevail over any inconsistencies within the agreement. The agreement's expiry date is July 1, 2030.
What it means for employers
Employers seeking to implement enterprise agreements should ensure compliance with all formal requirements, including accurate completion of employee representation notices. They also need to be aware that where an inconsistency exists between the enterprise agreement and the National Employment Standards, the NES will take precedence.
What it means for employees
Employees covered by this agreement benefit from entitlements outlined in the Maskill Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2026. Any inconsistencies with the National Employment Standards will be resolved in favour of the employee’s rights under the NES.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwca1688.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need this week sorted? A 7-Day Pass is 50 questions over 7 days, no account. Get a 7-Day Pass — $14.99
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections