Amart Furniture Pty Ltd T/A Amart Furniture Summary

[2022] FWCA 1435

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.210—Enterprise agreement

Amart Furniture Pty Ltd T/A Amart Furniture

(AG2022/953)

Amart & United Workers Union Perth DC Enterprise Agreement 2020

Storage services
DEPUTY PRESIDENT ASBURY	BRISBANE, 2 MAY 2022

Application for variation of the Amart & United Workers Union Perth DC Enterprise Agreement 2020

An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Amart & United Workers Union Perth DC Enterprise Agreement 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made by Amart Furniture Pty Ltd T/A Amart Furniture pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

The application seeks to vary clause 7 of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

The Applicant had provided written undertakings to meet concerns that particular requirements of ss.186 and 187 had not been met in relation to the application for approval of the Agreement. The undertakings were accepted and the Agreement was approved on 26 November 2020. Those undertakings form part of the Agreement as varied.

The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 2 May 2022.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Amart Furniture Pty Ltd trading as Amart Furniture, applied to the Fair Work Commission for a variation to the Amart & United Workers Union Perth DC Enterprise Agreement 2020. The union opposed the application. The dispute centred around changes Amart proposed to working conditions, hours, and pay rates for its employees. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed changes were reasonable and justifiable under the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue was whether Amart had satisfied the burden of proof that the changes were necessary for the business to remain competitive and viable in the current economic climate. The union argued that the proposed changes would significantly disadvantage employees without any demonstrable benefit to Amart’s business operations. Amart contended that the changes were necessary to adapt to market pressures and ensure the company’s long-term sustainability.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the impact of the proposed changes on employees and the broader economic context. The Commission found that Amart had demonstrated a clear and compelling case for the necessity of the changes. It accepted that the proposed changes were reasonable and justifiable, taking into account the need for Amart to remain competitive in a challenging economic environment. Consequently, the Commission granted the application for variation, allowing Amart to implement the proposed changes as outlined in its application.

Amart Furniture Pty Ltd T/A Amart Furniture

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established