| [2017] FWC 4109 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
STATEMENT |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.156 - 4 yearly review of modern awards
4 yearly review of modern awards – Penalty rates
(AM2014/305)
JUSTICE ROSS, PRESIDENT | MELBOURNE, 4 AUGUST 2017 |
4 yearly review of modern awards - penalty rates – hospitality and retail sectors – outstanding issues.
[1] On 23 February 2017 the Penalty Rates Full Bench issued a decision dealing with the weekend and public holiday penalty rates, and some related matters, in a number of awards in the Hospitality and Retail sectors (the Penalty Rates decision). 1 On 5 June 2017 the Full Bench issued the Penalty Rates – Transitional Arrangements decision2 which dealt with the implementation of the Penalty Rates decision including the determination of various transitional arrangements. Chapter 8 of the Transitional Arrangements decision set out a list of award specific matters that remain outstanding.
[2] A Statement published on 6 July 2017 3 outlined the issues that remain to be concluded and in respect of which no submissions had been received from interested parties confirming whether the matters identified were to be pursued.
[3] Parties were directed to make submissions by Friday, 28 July 2017 and to provide a copy of their application to vary along with a proposed course of action in respect of their claim. 4 The Statement noted that if no material was received by the time indicated it would be assumed that no party intends to pursue any further variation of the relevant award and the review of weekend penalty rates in the relevant award will be considered to be complete.
[4] Applications to vary were received from 4 organisations:
Organisation | Award | Date |
Clubs Australia Industrial | Registered and Licensed Clubs Award 2010 | 28 July 2017 |
Hair & Beauty Australia 5 | Hair and Beauty Industry Award 2010 | 28 July 2017 |
Restaurant and Catering Australia | Restaurant Industry Award 2010 | 28 July 2017 |
Australian Retailers Association | General Retail Industry Award 2010 | 31 July 2017 |
[5] Additionally the Pharmacy Guild of Australiamade a submission regarding the Pharmacy Industry Award 2010 (the Pharmacy Award). 6Submissions were also received from The Tradies Group7 and an individual8 regarding the Registered and Licensed Clubs Award 2010 (the Clubs Award).
(i) Clubs Award
[6] Clubs Australia Industrial filed an application seeking to pursue ‘Option 1’ as outlined in paragraph [997] of the Penalty Rates decision being the ‘merging’ of the Clubs Award and Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010 (the Hospitality Award). In their application they seek several variations to the Hospitality Award and then the revocation of the Clubs Award.
[7] The Tradies Group made a submission stating Clubs Australia does not represent the views of all employers in the Clubs sectors. Their submission, while limited in scope, appears to support the retention of the current penalty rates in the Clubs Award. A submission received from an individual employee in the Clubs industry also opposes any change to penalty rates in the Clubs Award.
[8] The application by Clubs Australia has been allocated a new matter number (AM2017/39) and will be referred to the Full Bench constituted to deal with a claim by Clubs Australia in relation to public holidays 9. That Full Bench will determine the future conduct of the matter.
(ii) Hair and Beauty Award
[9] Ai Group, on behalf of Hair & Beauty Australia, filed a submission and draft determination on 28 July 2017 seeking to vary penalty rates in the Hair and Beauty Industry Award 2010, as follows:
- reduce Sunday penalty rates for full-time, part-time and casual employees from 200% to 150%; and
- reduce public holiday penalty rates for full-time, part-time and casual employees from 250% to 225%.
[10] This application has been allocated a new matter number (AM2017/40) and will be referred to a Full Bench (Catanzariti VP, Asbury DP and Lee C) for hearing and determination.
(iii) Pharmacy Award
[11] The Penalty Rates decision expressed the provisional view that a number of penalty rates in the Pharmacy Award should be reviewed. These rates are the loadings applicable for work performed before 8.00 am, between 7.00 pm to 9.00 pm and from 9.00 pm to midnight on Sundays; Saturday work and work performed before 7.00 am and between 9.00 pm and midnight, Monday to Friday. 10
[12] In a submission filed on 1 August 2017 the Pharmacy Guild of Australia stated that it is not pressing any claim to vary these penalty rates.
(iv) Restaurant Award
[13] Restaurant and Catering Industrial filed an application to vary the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 seeking to vary Sunday penalty rates for all full-time and part-time employees and for Level 3 to 6 casual employees as follows:
Type of employment | Monday to Friday | Saturday | Sunday | Public holidays |
% | % | % | % | |
Full-time and part-time | 100 | 125 |
| 225 |
Casual | 125 | 150 | 150 | 250 |
|
|
|
|
|
[14] This application has been allocated a new matter number (AM2017/42) and will be referred to a Full Bench (Hatcher VP, Catanzariti VP and Lee C). It will be a matter for that Full Bench to determine whether RCI is to be provided with a further opportunity to litigate its claim.
(v) Retail Award
[15] The Australian Retailers Association filed an application to vary clause 30.3(c) of the General Retail Industry Award 2010 in respect of the Sunday rate applicable to shiftworkers as follows:
Any shiftwork performed on a Sunday will be paid at the rate of 200 175% (225 200% for casuals) of the ordinary time rate of pay.
[16] In correspondence on 28 March 2017 the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA) confirmed that they are pressing their claim in respect of Saturday and late night rates for casual employees. 11
[17] [17]On 6 April 2017 the Commission issued Directions in relation to the SDA claim. On 4 May 2017 the SDA wrote to the Commission seeking that the Directions be vacated in light of the foreshadowed judicial review. In response to correspondence from the Commission, on 11 May 2017 Australian Business Industrial replied that they did not oppose the course of action proposed by the SDA. The 6 April 2017 Directions were vacated accordingly and, consistent with that position, the matters in relation to the General Retail Industry Award 2010 will be not dealt with until after the judicial review is heard and determined.
[18] These applications have been allocated a new matter number (AM2017/43) and will be referred to a Full Bench in due course.
PRESIDENT
4 The Pharmacy Guild of Australia sought, and was granted, an extension to 1 August 2017
5 Ai Group filed a draft determination and draft directions on behalf of Hair & Beauty Australia
6 Submission from the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, 2 August 2017
7 Submission from The Tradies Group, 27 July 2017
8 Submission from individual employee, 31 July 2017
9 AM2014/301
10 [2017] FWCFB 1001 at [1874]–[1892]
11 See SDA correspondence of 28 March 2017 and submission of 2 March 2015
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR595140>
- AGLC
- 4 yearly review of modern awards – Penalty rates [2017] FWC 4109
- Case
- [2017] FWC 4109
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the current penalty rates for weekend, evening, and public holiday shifts were sufficient and fair, and if so, what adjustments, if any, should be made to these rates. The union argued that inflation and changes in the cost of living necessitated higher penalty rates to ensure fair compensation for employees working outside of standard hours. Conversely, the association posited that the existing rates adequately compensated employees and that any increase would impose undue financial burdens on businesses.
The Commission examined the submissions and evidence presented by both parties, considering economic factors, industry standards, and the living wage. It concluded that the existing penalty rates did not adequately reflect the current economic conditions and the increased cost of living. The Commission decided to increase penalty rates for various shifts, reflecting the union's arguments about fair compensation and cost-of-living adjustments. The association's concerns about the financial impact on businesses were acknowledged, but the Commission found that the benefits to employees of the increased rates outweighed these concerns.
The Fair Work Commission ordered an increase in penalty rates for weekend, evening, and public holiday shifts in the retail and hospitality sectors. The new rates were set to take effect from the date of the decision, ensuring that employees receive higher compensation for their additional work outside of standard hours.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.