Agnew Legal Pty Ltd

Case [2014] FWCA 2598


[2014] FWCA 2598

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

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

Agnew Legal Pty Ltd
(AG2014/829)

HOGS BREATH CAFE GLADSTONE PTY LTD - ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2018

Restaurants

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS

SYDNEY, 22 APRIL 2014

Application for approval of the Hogs Breath Cafe Gladstone Pty Ltd - Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018.

[1] This is an application, pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’), filed by Agnew Legal Pty Ltd (the ‘applicant’), a Bargaining Representative appointed by Hog’s Breath Cafe Gladstone Pty Ltd (the ‘employer’) which seeks the approval of the Fair Work Commission (the ‘Commission’) of a single enterprise agreement to be known as the Hogs Breath Cafe Gladstone Pty Ltd - Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018 (the ‘Agreement’). The Agreement is to cover 41 employees, other than Restaurant Managers, who are engaged at the applicant’s restaurant in Gladstone, Queensland. For the purposes of s 186(3) of the Act, I am satisfied that the group of employees to be covered by this Agreement has been fairly chosen.

[2] The employees were last notified of their representational rights on 17 March 2014, and voting for the Agreement’s approval took place on 9 April 2014. The time limits under s 181(2) of the Act are thereby satisfied. In a secret ballot, 18 of the 23 employees who voted, agreed to approve the Agreement. The application for approval of the Agreement was lodged on 9 April 2014, thereby satisfying s 185(3) of the Act.

[3] In the Employer’s Declaration in support of the application (Form F17) Mr A Staines, Director, identified the Restaurant Industry Award 2010 [MA000119] and the Cafe Restaurant and Catering Award - State (Excluding South-East Queensland) 2003 [AN140052] as the relevant reference instruments for the purposes of the Better Off Overall Test (the ‘BOOT’). Mr Stainessaid that the Agreement does contain some terms and conditions that are less beneficial than those under the reference instruments, including the removal of penalty rates for work performed on weekends, public holidays and other unsociable hours and the removal of a number of non-applicable allowances. However the Agreement also provides for a number of terms and conditions that are more beneficial, including substantially higher rates of pay. Rates of pay are to be increased by 2.5% on 1 July 2014, 1 July 2015, 1 July 2016 and 1 July 2017. I am satisfied that the Agreement passes the BOOT. The Agreement provides for the mandatory flexibility and consultation terms at clauses 7.1 and 7.3 respectively, and a disputes resolution procedure at clause 2.4 provides for conciliation and arbitration by the Commission.

[4] At a hearing of the application on 16 April 2014, Mr C Agnew, Solicitorappeared for the applicant and Mr A Staines for the employer. Mr Agnew outlined the main features of the Agreement and submitted that all of the legislative requirements for approval of the Agreement have been satisfied and the Agreement should be approved by the Commission. Mr Staines explained that the employer currently only employed casual employees, but planned to offer full-time and part-time positions in the future.

[5] Having heard the applicant’s submissions and upon reviewing the terms of the preapproval process documentation and the Agreement itself, I am satisfied that all of the requirements of the Act, in particular ss 180, 186, 187 and 188, in so far as relevant to this application, have been met. Accordingly, I approve a single enterprise agreement known as the Hogs Breath Cafe Gladstone Pty Ltd - Enterprise Agreement 2014-2018.Pursuant to s 54 of the Act, the Agreement shall operate from 23 April 2014 and have a nominal expiry date of 1 March 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code C, AE407775  PR549807>

Details
AGLC
Agnew Legal Pty Ltd [2014] FWCA 2598
Case
[2014] FWCA 2598
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Agnew Legal Pty Ltd, acting on behalf of the Fair Work Commission, who applied for the approval of the Enterprise Agreement between Hogs Breath Cafe Gladstone Pty Ltd and its employees for the period 2014-2018. The application was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The primary dispute centred on whether the agreement met the necessary standards and requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in terms of the agreement's compliance with the good faith bargaining provisions and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees.

The court was required to determine if the Enterprise Agreement was made in good faith, if it complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act, and if it provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees. This included assessing whether the agreement contained minimum entitlements as specified by the Act, and whether the process through which the agreement was reached was fair and reasonable.

The court found that the Enterprise Agreement did meet the necessary standards and requirements under the Fair Work Act. The court concluded that the agreement was made in good faith, as there was evidence of genuine bargaining between the parties. The court also determined that the agreement provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees, as it included minimum entitlements and other provisions that were fair and reasonable. Consequently, the court approved the Enterprise Agreement for the period 2014-2018.

The final orders of the court approved the Enterprise Agreement between Hogs Breath Cafe Gladstone Pty Ltd and its employees for the period 2014-2018. The court's approval was based on the determination that the agreement was made in good faith, complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act, and provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions 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.