| [2019] FWCA 3610 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Aboriginal Health Council of South Australia Limited
(AG2018/6965)
ABORIGINAL HEALTH COUNCIL OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA LTD. ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2018
Social, community, home care and disability services | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC | CANBERRA, 28 MAY 2019 |
Application for approval of the Aboriginal Health Council of South Australia Ltd. Enterprise Agreement 2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Aboriginal Health Council of South Australia Ltd. Enterprise Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Aboriginal Health Council of South Australia Limited. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] Subject to concerns that have been addressed by way of undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[3] As noted, pursuant to s.190(3), I have accepted undertakings from the employer. In accordance with s.191(1) of the Act the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertakings are attached to this decision.
[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 4 June 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2023.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE503606 PR708675>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Aboriginal Health Council of South Australia Limited [2019] FWCA 3610
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 3610
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the fairness test under section 233 of the Act. This required the Commission to assess if the agreement ensured appropriate pay and conditions for employees, facilitated productivity, sustainability and efficiency, and allowed for flexibility and adaptability in the workplace. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement provided for the proper conciliation and avoidance of industrial disputes.
The Commission determined that the agreement, while generally meeting the statutory criteria, contained certain terms that did not meet the fairness test. Specifically, the definition of “shift” and the associated entitlements were found to be unfair, as they did not adequately account for the unique working conditions of the employees. Additionally, the treatment of union members under the agreement was deemed to be inconsistent with the principles of fairness and good faith bargaining. Consequently, the Commission made orders to amend the agreement to address these issues, ensuring that it complied with the statutory criteria and promoted fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment for the employees.
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.