4 yearly review of modern awards—National Training Wage

The parties in this case were the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) and the Department of Employment. The dispute involved the annual review of the National Training Wage, a specific schedule within the Modern Awards. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The central legal issue was whether the FWC had the authority to set the National Training Wage in a manner that did not directly reference the next steps in the wage progression. The ACTU argued that the FWC should adhere strictly to the reference terms outlined in the Fair Work Act, which explicitly included the next steps in the wage progression.

The FWC examined the statutory framework provided by the Fair Work Act and relevant precedents. It considered whether the omission of the next steps in the National Training Wage schedule was compliant with the legislative requirements. The Commission concluded that while the Fair Work Act mandated referencing certain terms, it did not explicitly require the inclusion of the next steps in the wage schedule. The FWC determined that the omission did not render the wage schedule invalid, provided that the overall wage progression was fair and reasonable.

As a result, the FWC upheld the wage schedule as it stood, finding no legal basis to require the inclusion of the next steps. The decision affirmed the FWC's discretion in setting wages within the bounds of fairness and reasonableness, without mandating adherence to a specific format for the wage schedule. The final orders confirmed the National Training Wage schedule as set by the Department of Employment, with no requirement for the inclusion of the next steps in the schedule.