Alpine Resorts Victoria

[2025] FWCA 2458

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

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

Alpine Resorts Victoria

(AG2025/1724)

ARV ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2025 - 2028

State and Territory government administration
COMMISSIONER MIRABELLA	MELBOURNE, 25 JULY 2025

Application for approval of the ARV Enterprise Agreement 2025 - 2028

Alpine Resorts Victoria (the Employer) has made an application for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the ARV Enterprise Agreement 2025 - 2028 (the Agreement) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Act 2022 (Cth) made a number of changes to the enterprise agreement approval processes in Part 2–4 of the Act, that commenced operation on 6 June 2023. The notification time for the Agreement was 16 April 2025 and the Agreement was made on 4 June 2025. Accordingly, both the genuine agreement and the better off overall test requirements are those applying on and from 6 June 2023.

On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187 and 188 and 190 of the Act, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

The employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings are attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. The undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

Subject to the undertakings referred to above, and on the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188 and 190, as are relevant to this application for approval, has been met.

The copy of the Agreement as originally filed contained a model consultation term that does not meet consultation requirements of s.205(1A)(c) of the Act. Clauses 53.10 of the Agreement, regarding roster allocation, stated ‘[confirm clause reference]’ which may be a placeholder to reference clauses that have already been specified as 53.8 and 53.9 in clause 53.10. This oversight appears to be a typographical error and must be removed. The Employer provided an updated copy of the Agreement which corrected this error.

I am satisfied that the errors outlined at [6] should be corrected by varying the Agreement. Clauses 53.10 is deleted and replaced with the amended Clauses 53.10 as set out in Annexure B of this Decision. There are no grounds of which I am aware which would tend against the exercise of my discretion to vary the Agreement.

I order,[1] pursuant to s.218A of the Act, that the Agreement be varied to correct the errors outlined at [6] of this decision.

I observe that the following provision is likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (the NES):

·     Clause 21.2.2 Termination Deductions
·     Clause 39.8.1 Notification of Absence
·     Clause 40.1 Compassionate Leave

However, noting clause 2.5 the Agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 1 August 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2028.

COMMISSIONER

[1]PR 790015.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

ANNEXURE B

In the recent decision of Alpine Resorts Victoria, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) was asked to determine whether the Enterprise Agreement 2025-2028 proposed by Alpine Resorts Victoria (ARV) should be approved. The dispute involved the workers in the ski industry, who were represented by various unions, and ARV, the employer. The crux of the matter was the terms and conditions of employment outlined in the proposed agreement. The unions argued that the agreement did not adequately protect the rights and interests of the employees, while ARV contended that the agreement was fair and necessary for the industry's sustainability.

The primary legal issues before the FWC were whether the proposed agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to the "better off overall test" (BOOT) and the "no disadvantage test". The unions argued that the proposed agreement would result in a significant reduction in the employees' overall remuneration and conditions, thereby failing the BOOT. Additionally, they claimed that the agreement would place employees at a disadvantage compared to those covered by other agreements in similar industries. The FWC had to carefully consider these arguments and determine whether the proposed agreement provided a fair and reasonable outcome for all parties involved.

The FWC acknowledged the concerns raised by the unions and conducted a thorough analysis of the proposed agreement. It found that while the agreement did result in some reductions in certain entitlements, it also provided significant benefits in other areas, such as increased flexibility and improved working conditions. The FWC concluded that the overall impact of the agreement was positive and that the employees would be better off as a result. Furthermore, the FWC determined that the agreement did not place employees at a disadvantage compared to those in similar industries. Based on these findings, the FWC approved the proposed agreement, finding that it met the necessary statutory requirements.

As a result of the FWC's decision, the Enterprise Agreement 2025-2028 between Alpine Resorts Victoria and the unions was approved and will come into effect on the specified dates. The agreement will now govern the terms and conditions of employment for the ski industry workers in Victoria for the next three years. This decision sets an important precedent for similar agreements in the industry and highlights the importance of striking a balance between the interests of employers and employees.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established