Ararat Retirement Village Inc T/A Gorrinn House Hostel

Case [2019] FWCA 895


[2019] FWCA 895
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Ararat Retirement Village Inc T/A Gorrinn House Hostel
(AG2018/4640)

ARARAT RETIREMENT VILLAGE INC. (TRADING AS GORRINN VILLAGE), ANMF AND HSU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Aged care industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON

MELBOURNE, 15 FEBRUARY 2019

Ararat Retirement Village Inc. (trading as Gorrinn Village), ANMF and HSU Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Ararat Retirement Village Inc. (Trading as Gorrinn Village), ANMF And HSU Enterprise Agreement 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Ararat Retirement Village Inc T/A Gorrinn House Hostel. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is 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.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] I note that Clauses 53.2, 54.5(c), 54.5(e) are inconsistent with the National Employment Standards as clause 53.2 restricts shiftworker definition, clauses 54.5(c) and 54.5(e) are inconsistent with personal leave contained in the NES. Given the National Employment Standards precedence clause at clause 6 of the agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail.

[5] The Agreement lodged contained an error at clauses 10.1 and 27.7(e). On 30 January 2019, the Applicant filed amended pages of the Agreement pursuant to s.586 of the Act. I am satisfied that the correction should be made and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act.

[6] The Health Services Union of Australia and Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 22 February 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 May 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE501765  PR704850>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
Ararat Retirement Village Inc T/A Gorrinn House Hostel [2019] FWCA 895
Case
[2019] FWCA 895
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ararat Retirement Village Inc., trading as Gorrinn Village, sought a determination regarding its employment of a number of its workers under the ANMF and HSU Enterprise Agreement 2017. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary issue before the court was whether the workers in question were covered by the terms of the enterprise agreement, and if not, what the implications of this were for both the employer and the employees. The court needed to clarify the scope of the agreement and its application to the workers' roles and responsibilities.

The court examined the language of the enterprise agreement and the specific roles of the employees in question. It found that the terms of the agreement did not explicitly cover all of the employees' roles. Given this, the court had to determine the appropriate course of action under the Fair Work Act 2009. The decision hinged on whether the workers were performing duties that were outside the scope of the agreement, and if so, what the consequences were for both the employer and the employees. The court also considered the implications for the employer's obligations under the agreement.

The Fair Work Commission determined that the employees in question were not covered by the enterprise agreement. Consequently, the employer was not bound by the terms of the agreement in relation to these employees. This meant that the employer could not enforce any terms of the agreement against these workers. The court also considered the employees' entitlements under the National Employment Standards and other applicable awards. The court ordered that the employer comply with these entitlements moving forward.

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.