Application by Turosi Pty Ltd
Citation: [2026] FWCA 2161
What happened
Turosi Pty Ltd, a poultry processing company, applied for approval of the Turosi Geelong and United Workers' Union Enterprise Agreement 2025. The United Workers' Union (UWU) supported the agreement and sought to be covered by it. The Fair Work Commission considered the agreement's compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. A minor procedural error occurred with the Notice of Employee Representational Rights, using an outdated form.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission approved the Turosi Geelong and United Workers' Union Enterprise Agreement 2025. While the Notice of Employee Representational Rights had a minor error, the Commission found it did not disadvantage employees. The agreement incorporates a model flexibility term and a workplace delegates’ rights term due to its absence in the agreement itself. Several clauses were noted as inconsistent with the National Employment Standards but were deemed acceptable due to the agreement’s NES precedence clause. Turosi provided undertakings to address concerns, which are now part of the agreement.
What it means for employers
Employers should ensure compliance with the prescribed forms for notices to employees regarding representational rights. While minor errors may be overlooked, it's crucial to avoid any actions that could disadvantage employees. When drafting enterprise agreements, consider including standard terms like flexibility and workplace delegate rights, or be prepared for them to be incorporated automatically.
What it means for employees
Employees covered by the agreement benefit from the terms negotiated with the UWU. The agreement prioritises the National Employment Standards, meaning employees receive the more favourable outcome where the agreement and the NES differ. The undertakings provided by Turosi offer additional protections and clarity.
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/2026fwca2161.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 today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours. No account, nothing to cancel.
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