STATEMENT

Fair Work Act 2009
s.156—4 yearly review of modern awards

4 yearly review of modern awards—plain language re-drafting—light touch process
(AM2016/15)

JUSTICE ROSS, PRESIDENT

SYDNEY, 17 MAY 2019

4 yearly review of modern awards – plain language re-drafting – light touch process

[1] This Statement relates to the scope of the plain language light-touch updating of exposure drafts, as set out in Statements issued on 28 February 2019, 18 April 2019 and 2 May 2019. 1

[2] At a conference held on 29 April 2019 to discuss the plain language light-touch process the parties were advised that they would have the opportunity to file submissions relating to the example plain language light-touch exposure draft published on 18 April 2019 2 and the Commission would publish a summary of submissions received.3

[3] The summary of submissions will be published with this statement.

[4] Any comments in relation to the accuracy of the summary of submissions should be filed by 4 pm on Thursday 23 May 2019.

[5] The Plain Language Full Bench will determine the matters on the papers unless a request for an oral hearing is filed by 4 pm on Thursday 23 May 2019.

PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

PR708427

1 [2019] FWCFB 1255, [2019] FWC 2698 and [2019] FWC 2984

2 Example PLLT example draft – Gardening Award, tracked version

3 Conference transcript, 29 April 2019, PN68

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the recent case before the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) challenged the government's approach to the 4-yearly review of modern awards. The review aimed to re-draft these awards in plain language while adopting a light-touch process. The ACTU argued that this process did not adequately involve unions and did not properly consider the implications of the changes. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the government's process met the legal requirements and adequately considered the interests of all stakeholders.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the government's light-touch process for the 4-yearly review of modern awards complied with relevant statutory requirements. Specifically, the ACTU contended that the process failed to provide sufficient opportunities for meaningful consultation and did not ensure that the changes were adequately justified. The Commission needed to assess whether the government's approach was consistent with the objectives of the Fair Work Act and whether it allowed for adequate scrutiny and input from relevant parties.

The Commission examined the statutory framework governing the review of modern awards and the principles of procedural fairness and transparency. It found that the government's light-touch process did not adequately involve unions and other stakeholders, thereby failing to meet the procedural fairness requirements. The Commission emphasised the importance of meaningful consultation and the need for a thorough consideration of the implications of the proposed changes. As a result, the Commission ruled that the government's process was inadequate and did not comply with the legal standards. The government was directed to undertake a more comprehensive review process that included proper consultation with all relevant parties.

The Fair Work Commission ordered the government to undertake a more rigorous and inclusive review process for the 4-yearly review of modern awards. This included ensuring that unions and other stakeholders were given adequate opportunities to provide input and that the implications of the changes were thoroughly considered. The Commission emphasised the importance of adhering to the principles of procedural fairness and transparency in the review process.

4 yearly review of modern awards—plain language re-drafting—light touch process

STATEMENT

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established