Agnew Legal Pty Ltd

Case [2015] FWCA 1247


[2015] FWCA 1247
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Agnew Legal Pty Ltd
(AG2014/8107)

TRUPT PTY LTD - ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014.

Fast food industry

COMMISSIONER BULL

SYDNEY, 25 FEBRUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Trupt Pty Ltd - Enterprise Agreement 2014.

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

[2] The Commission wrote to the Applicant via its legal representative, Mr Christopher Agnew on a number of occasions with respect to concerns it had with the Agreement. In particular, the concerns related to whether the Agreement satisfied the better off overall test. The Commission granted extensions of time for the applicant to address these issues, and held a telephone conference with the applicant’s legal representative on 16 February 2015 in relation to the better off overall test.

[3] Correspondence was received from the applicant on 26 November 2014, 9 and 10 December 2014, and 19 and 20 February 2015.

Better off overall test (BOOT)

[4] With respect to the BOOT, the Commission noted that the following entitlements under the Agreement were lower when compared to the Fast Food Industry Award 2010 (the Award), being the relevant award for the purposes of the BOOT. The Commission requested the applicant demonstrate how employees would be better off overall under the Agreement when they would receive higher entitlements under the Award.

Annual leave loading

[5] With respect to clause 5.1 - Annual leave, the Commission notes that the Agreement does not provide annual leave loading. The Commission requested the applicant address this issue.

[6] The applicant submitted that the higher hourly rate of pay under the Agreement incorporates an annual leave loading entitlement.

Maximum Hours

[7] With respect to clause 4.1.2- Hours of work- Part time employees, and in particular sub clause 4.1.2(b), the Commission noted that part time employees could be engaged for a maximum of 11.5 hours per shift under the Agreement, in comparison to a maximum of 11 hours under the Award.

Undertaking

[8] At the request of the Commission, the applicant has provided an undertaking which states that the maximum hours a part time employee may be engaged is 11 hours which is in line with the Award.

Penalties

[9] The Commission notes that the Agreement does not provide penalties for public holidays 1 and weekends.2

[10] On 28 January 2015, the applicant submitted that the higher hourly rate of pay compensated for the removal of penalties under the Agreement and provided submitted a number of indicative rosters and calculations to support the applicant’s submission.

[11] The Commission was not satisfied of the applicant’s submissions that the removal of weekend and public holiday penalty rates were duly compensated by the hourly rates under the Agreement. The Commission requested further correspondence from the applicant to address the Commission’s concerns with regard to the BOOT, and in particular those employees who worked the majority of their hours on the weekend.

Undertaking

[12] The applicant has provided an undertaking with increased hourly rates of pay and an employee reconciliation clause which states that upon an employee’s employment anniversary date, or termination of employment, an employee is entitled to request a reconciliation to establish whether any amount paid to them for work performed under the Agreement is less than what they would have received for work performed under the Award.

[13] Where such reconciliation establishes that the employee has been paid less under the Agreement, the employer will reimburse the employee for the difference between the amount paid under the Award and the amount paid under the Agreement.

[14] Further, the applicant has provided an undertaking which states that the hourly rates under the Agreement will increase over the nominal period of the Agreement in accordance with the Annual Wage Review Decisions of the Wage Panel of the Fair Work Commission.

[15] The undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertakings are attached at Annexure A.

[16] The undertakings are not so substantial that if asked to vote again the employees who voted would not approve the Agreement. I am therefore satisfied that the undertakings do not result in a substantial change to the Agreement as per s.190(3)(b) of the Act.

[17] 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.

[18] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with section 54(1), the Agreement will operate from 4 March 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 December 2016.

[19] This decision is to be brought to the attention of employees by the applicant, noting the right for employees arising out of the reconciliation undertaking.

COMMISSIONER

COMMISSIONER

Annexure A

 1   See clause 5.7.1- Payment for work on public holidays

 2   See clause 3.2- Wages

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE412728  PR561288>

Details
AGLC
Agnew Legal Pty Ltd [2015] FWCA 1247
Case
[2015] FWCA 1247
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Agnew Legal Pty Ltd as the applicant, seeking approval for the Trupt Pty Ltd - Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant's purpose was to establish terms and conditions of employment for its employees covered by the agreement. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The legal issues before the court centred on whether the proposed agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the agreement provided for a safety net of minimum wages and conditions, whether it was free from coercion and undue influence, and whether it included proper dispute resolution mechanisms.

The court considered submissions from both parties and examined the terms of the proposed agreement. The applicant argued that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms, including appropriate wages, leave entitlements, and dispute resolution processes. The court found that the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval, as it provided for a safety net of minimum wages and conditions and did not include any terms that were contrary to public policy or contrary to any law. The court also noted that there was no evidence of coercion or undue influence in the negotiation and execution of the agreement. The dispute resolution mechanisms included in the agreement were deemed adequate for the purposes of the Act.

Based on its findings, the court approved the Trupt Pty Ltd - Enterprise Agreement 2014. The court noted that the agreement was fair and reasonable and met all the legal requirements for approval. The court considered that the agreement provided for a safety net of minimum wages and conditions, did not include any terms that were contrary to public policy or any law, and included adequate dispute resolution mechanisms. The applicant's application was successful, and the agreement was approved as a registered agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009.

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.