Argosy Agricultural Group Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 7991

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s 185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Argosy Agricultural Group Pty Ltd
(AG2013/9624)

ARGOSY AGRICULTURAL GROUP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Agriculture Industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS	SYDNEY, 11 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the Argosy Agricultural Group Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] This is an application, pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’), filed by Argosy Agricultural Group Pty Ltd (the ‘applicant’) which seeks the approval of the Fair Work Commission (the ‘Commission’) of a single enterprise agreement to be known as the Argosy Agricultural Group Enterprise Agreement 2013) (the ‘Agreement’). The Agreement is to cover all of the employees engaged by the applicant at its polo facility at Richmond, NSW, ranging from clerical work to gardeners, mechanic workers and grooms. 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 28 June 2013, and voting for the Agreement’s approval took place on 16 September 2013. The time limits under s 181(2) of the Act are thereby satisfied. In a ballot, all 7 of the employees who cast a vote, agreed to approve the Agreement. The application for approval of the Agreement was lodged on 27 September 2013, thereby satisfying s 185(3) of the Act.

[3] In the Employer’s Declaration in support of the application (Form F17), Ms Fiona Turney, Group Manager, identified the Clerks - Private Sector Award 2010 [MA000002], Cleaning Services Award 2010 [MA000022], Gardening and Landscaping Services Award 2010 [MA000101], Vehicle Manufacturing, Repair, Services and Retail Award 2010 [MA000089], Pastoral Award 2010 [MA000035] and Horse and Greyhound Training Award 2010 [MA000008] as the relevant reference instruments for the purposes of the Better Off Overall Test (the ‘BOOT’). Ms Turneysaid when compared with the relevant reference instruments, the Agreement provides for a yearly wage increase (2.5% per year effective every 1 July), higher wage rates and a planning day every six months where the employees are provided with training and development programs. Ms Turney noted that the Agreement contains one less beneficial term, that is, a stand down provision that provides for employees to be stood down without pay in the event of an equipment breakdown or inclement weather. I am satisfied that the Agreement passes the BOOT. The Agreement provides for the mandatory flexibility and consultation terms at clauses 17 and 18 respectively, and a disputes resolution procedure at clause 19 provides for mediation and conciliation by the Commission.

[4] At a hearing of the application on 11 October 2013, Ms Helen Carter, solicitor and Ms Lucienne Gleeson, solicitor,appeared for the applicant. Ms Carter 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. Ms Carter explained that the applicant is engaged in a polo club business, together with agricultural work. As a result, the employees are currently governed by a multitude of Awards as outlined by Ms Turney in her declaration. Ms Carter submitted that the Agreement would assist the applicant in managing its employees as well as improving the workplace culture by providing the same terms and conditions for all employees. Ms Carter stated that on her calculations, the wage rates under the Agreement were approximately 10% higher than the equivalent rates under the relevant Awards. Furthermore, Ms Carter noted that due to the diverse roles of the employees, the Agreement contains a generic clause in respect of hours of work, whereby the ordinary hours are those negotiated and agreed to by the applicant and the employee. She did note, however, that it is a term of the agreement that the ordinary hours are not to exceed an average of 38 hours per week over a period of 4 weeks.

[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 Argosy Agricultural Group Enterprise Agreement 2013 Pursuant to s 54 of the Act, the Agreement shall operate from 18 October 2013 and have a nominal expiry date of 1 July 2016.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved Argosy Agricultural Group Pty Ltd, an agricultural business, and its employees represented by the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union. The dispute centred on the application for the approval of the Argosy Agricultural Group Enterprise Agreement 2013. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the statutory requirements and was in the best interests of the employees. The case hinged on the adequacy of the agreement's provisions concerning wages, conditions, and employee protections, as well as the process through which the agreement was negotiated.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement was made in good faith, whether it complied with the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was negotiated independently, as required by the legislation, and whether it included appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms. The Commission also examined whether the agreement adequately addressed the specific needs and circumstances of the agricultural workforce, particularly in light of the unique challenges and risks inherent in the industry.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the Argosy Agricultural Group Enterprise Agreement 2013 largely met the statutory requirements and was in the best interests of the employees. The Commission acknowledged the complexity of the negotiations and the need for a tailored agreement that recognised the particularities of the agricultural sector. The agreement was deemed to provide fair and reasonable terms, including provisions for wages, leave, and other employment conditions, which were considered appropriate for the workforce. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement was negotiated in good faith and complied with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, recognising its value in providing a stable and equitable framework for the employer-employee relationship in the agricultural industry.

The Commission's final order was the approval of the Argosy Agricultural Group Enterprise Agreement 2013. This decision allowed the agreement to come into effect, providing a legally binding framework for the terms and conditions of employment for the employees of Argosy Agricultural Group Pty Ltd. The approval was contingent upon the parties adhering to the terms set out in the agreement, ensuring that it continued to meet the needs of both the employer and the employees in the agricultural sector.

Argosy Agricultural Group Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established