Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 4301

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2013/7212)

ARISTOCRAT TECHNOLOGIES AUSTRALIA PTY LTD CALL CENTRE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Contract call centre industry
COMMISSIONER CARGILL	SYDNEY, 4 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd Call Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd Call Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was not lodged within 14 days after it was made. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b) I consider it fair to extend the time for making this application to 25 June 2013.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 11 July 2013. The nominal expiry date is 31 March 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd Call Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013. The respondents to the application were the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Alliance Workers Union and the Australian Services Union. The nature of the dispute was primarily focused on the terms and conditions of employment, particularly those concerning shift patterns, shift loadings, overtime, and rostered days off.

The legal issues before the court were whether the agreement provided adequate protection for employees in relation to shift patterns and shift loadings, and whether the provisions regarding overtime and rostered days off were fair and reasonable. The unions argued that the agreement did not sufficiently protect employees' rights to avoid night shifts and excessive overtime, and that the provisions for rostered days off were not adequate.

The court found that while the agreement contained provisions to protect employees from excessive night shifts and overtime, these provisions were not as robust as they could be. The court also noted that the agreement did not provide for any rostered days off for employees who worked irregular hours. However, the court was satisfied that the agreement overall provided a fair and reasonable framework for the employment relationship. It approved the agreement subject to certain modifications, including the addition of provisions to ensure that employees were not required to work excessive night shifts or overtime, and to provide for rostered days off for employees working irregular hours.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established