4 yearly review of modern awards – Plain language re-drafting – Pharmacy Industry Award 2010

In the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Pharmacy Guild and the Pharmacy Guild of Australia sought a review of the Pharmacy Industry Award 2010. The central dispute focused on the language used in the casual conversion clause, which both parties argued was not sufficiently clear. The Commission was tasked with assessing the appropriateness of the clause's language and determining whether amendments were necessary to ensure it was written in plain language.

The legal issues before the Commission involved interpreting the requirements for plain language in modern awards, as mandated by section 208 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The parties disputed whether the existing casual conversion clause met these requirements and if any changes were needed to enhance clarity and accessibility for employees and employers. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the proposed re-drafting by the respondents sufficiently improved the clause's plain language compliance.

The Commission found that the original clause did not meet the plain language requirements as it was not written in a manner that was clear and easily understood by those affected by it. The Commission noted that the clause contained technical language and complex legal terms which could potentially confuse or mislead employees and employers. After examining the proposed re-drafting by the respondents, the Commission concluded that while there were improvements, further amendments were necessary to fully comply with the plain language requirements. The Commission issued directions for the parties to work together to finalise a clause that was appropriately drafted in plain language.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the Pharmacy Industry Award 2010 be amended to include a casual conversion clause that was drafted in plain language. The Commission directed the parties to collaborate in finalising the clause within a specified timeframe and to submit it for approval. This decision underscored the importance of clear and accessible language in employment awards to ensure all parties fully understand their rights and obligations.