DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Armest Pty Ltd T/A Miles Witt Partnership
(AG2017/5998)

JOHNSON STENNER AGED CARE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Aged care industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 16 MARCH 2018

Application for approval of the Johnson Stenner Aged Care Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Johnson Stenner Aged Care 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 Armest Pty Ltd T/A Miles Witt Partnership. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant 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] The 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 23 March 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2020.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Armest Pty Ltd, trading as Miles Witt Partnership, applied for the approval of the Johnson Stenner Aged Care Enterprise Agreement 2017, which was the subject of a dispute between the applicant and the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia, where the applicant sought the court's approval of the agreement that had been registered by the FWC. The applicant argued that the FWC had acted outside of its jurisdiction and contrary to the law in approving the agreement, thereby making the approval unlawful.

The court examined whether the FWC had correctly exercised its powers under the Fair Work Act 2009 in approving the enterprise agreement. Key issues included whether the FWC had the authority to approve the agreement without conducting a new process and whether the FWC had acted irrationally by not considering the applicant's submissions. The applicant contended that the FWC had failed to consider its submissions, thereby acting outside of its jurisdiction and contrary to the law. The applicant also argued that the FWC's approval of the agreement was irrational and not in accordance with the law.

The court found that the FWC had not acted outside of its jurisdiction or contrary to the law in approving the agreement. The court held that the FWC had the authority to approve the agreement without conducting a new process, as the agreement had already been registered. The court also found that the FWC had considered the applicant's submissions and that its approval of the agreement was rational and in accordance with the law. The court rejected the applicant's argument that the FWC had failed to consider its submissions and held that the FWC had acted within its jurisdiction and in accordance with the law.

The court dismissed the application and upheld the FWC's approval of the Johnson Stenner Aged Care Enterprise Agreement 2017. The court found that the FWC had correctly exercised its powers under the Fair Work Act 2009 in approving the agreement and that its approval was not irrational or contrary to the law. The applicant's application for the court's approval of the agreement was dismissed, and the FWC's approval of the agreement was upheld.

Armest Pty Ltd T/A Miles Witt Partnership

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established