| [2020] FWCFB 4930 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
STATEMENT |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.156—4 yearly review of modern awards
4 yearly review of modern awards—Professional Employees Award 2020—Substantive claims
(AM2019/5)
JUSTICE ROSS, PRESIDENT | MELBOURNE, 15 SEPTEMBER 2020 |
4 yearly review of modern awards – award stage – group 4 awards – substantive issues –Professional Employees Award 2020
[1] This Statement deals with substantive claims by the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) and Australian Industry Group (Ai Group) to vary the Professional Employees Award 2020 (the Professionals Award) as part of the 4 yearly review of modern awards (the Review).
[2] On 22 April 2020, we issued a Decision 1 (the April 2020 Decision) concerning a claim by APESMA to vary Clause 13 – Hours of work and a claim by Ai Group to vary Clause 2 – Definitions of the Professionals Award.
[3] In the April 2020 Decision, we said that we were satisfied that the proposed amendment to Clause 2 had merit and was necessary to achieve the modern awards objective. We granted the claim by Ai Group and amended the Professional Award accordingly.
[4] In respect of APESMA’s claim to vary Clause 13 of the award, in the April 2020 Decision, we said that there were four deficiencies in the proposed clause. 2 We also said that the proposed clause lacked merit and we rejected the claim.
[5] In the April 2020 Decision, we provided APESMA and Ai Group an opportunity to rectify the deficiencies in their proposed award variation and to submit a revised variation determination and submission in support. The following submissions were received:
• APESMA
• Ai Group
[6] Interested parties are given 14 days to respond to the submissions filed. Submissions are due by 4pm on Tuesday 29 September 2020 and sent to [email protected].
PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR722769>
2 Ibid at [85]
- AGLC
- 4 yearly review of modern awards—Professional Employees Award 2020—Substantive claims [2020] FWCFB 4930
- Case
- [2020] FWCFB 4930
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the existing classifications and pay rates within the Professional Employees Award 2020 were adequate and appropriate, given the evolving nature of professional work and the economic context. The Commission had to assess submissions from both employer and employee representatives, considering factors such as the nature of professional work, the skill levels required, and the current market conditions. The Commission also needed to ensure that the award complied with the principles of the modern awards system, which emphasise fairness and balance in the workplace.
The Fair Work Commission found that while the existing award had been effective, certain adjustments were necessary to better reflect the modern professional environment. The Commission determined that the classifications and pay rates required some amendments to ensure they were reflective of the current labour market conditions and to address some discrepancies identified during the review process. The Commission concluded that the award should be modified to better accommodate the diverse nature of professional work and to ensure that it provided a fair and equitable framework for both employers and employees. As a result, the Commission issued revised award provisions that incorporated the necessary changes.
In light of the review, the Commission made several amendments to the Professional Employees Award 2020. These included adjustments to certain classification levels and corresponding pay rates, as well as clarifications to certain definitions and conditions of employment. The Commission also made several minor adjustments to improve the clarity and enforceability of the award. The revised award was designed to ensure that it remained a fair and balanced document that met the needs of both employers and employees within the professional sector.
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.