DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Adria Village Limited
(AG2015/2167)

ADRIA VILLAGE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014 - 2017

Aged care industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH	SYDNEY, 1 APRIL 2015

Application for approval of the Adria Village Enterprise Agreement 2014 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Adria Village Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Adria Village Limited. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Health Services Union New South Wales Branch, the Australian Capital Territory Branch of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation and United Voice, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[3] 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.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 8 April 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Adria Village Limited was a party to an enterprise agreement that was due to expire. The applicant, Adria Village Limited, sought the Fair Work Commission's approval of a new enterprise agreement, the Adria Village Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017, which would cover a period of three years. The applicant was a property developer involved in the construction and management of a residential development. The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue was whether the new enterprise agreement complied with the requirements of section 230 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which mandates that an agreement must be in writing, provide for the rate of pay, and not discriminate against employees. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it allowed for the fair resolution of workplace issues. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable and met all legislative requirements. The respondent argued that the agreement did not adequately protect employees and contained provisions that were contrary to the public interest.

The Commission found that the agreement was in writing, provided for rates of pay, and did not discriminate against employees. However, it noted that the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the public interest, specifically a clause that allowed for the exclusion of certain workers from the agreement. The Commission also found that the agreement did not adequately protect employees in terms of their entitlements and conditions of employment. As a result, the Commission did not approve the agreement. The applicant was ordered to renegotiate the agreement with the employees and their representatives to address the identified issues.

The Fair Work Commission did not approve the proposed enterprise agreement due to several provisions being contrary to the public interest and inadequate protection of employee entitlements and conditions of employment. The applicant was directed to renegotiate the agreement with the employees and their representatives to address the issues identified by the Commission.

Adria Village Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established