Aruma Services Ltd

Case [2025] FWCA 2067


[2025] FWCA 2067

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Aruma Services Ltd

(AG2025/1459)

ARUMA SERVICES (EMPLOYMENT) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2025

Disability services industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAUNDERS

NEWCASTLE, 24 JUNE 2025

Application for approval of the Aruma Services (Employment) Enterprise Agreement 2025

Introduction

  1. Aruma Services Ltd (Employer) has made an application for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Aruma Services (Employment) Enterprise Agreement 2025 (Agreement) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

Section 190 Undertakings

  1. The Employer has provided written undertakings (Undertakings). A copy of the Undertakings is attached in Schedule C to this decision. I am satisfied that the effect of accepting the Undertakings is not likely to:

(a) cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement; or

(b) result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

  1. Pursuant to subsection 190(3) of the Act, I accept the Undertakings. The Undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement.

Section 186, 187, 188 and 190

  1. Subject to the Undertakings, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

Approval

  1. The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with section 54 of the Act, will operate from 1 July 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2028.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE529453  PR788524>

Details
AGLC
Aruma Services Ltd [2025] FWCA 2067
Case
[2025] FWCA 2067
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Aruma Services Ltd sought approval of the Aruma Services (Employment) Enterprise Agreement 2025. The application was opposed by the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU). The dispute centred around whether the proposed enterprise agreement was fair and reasonable, given the union's objections. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the fairness and reasonableness of the agreement, as well as addressing the union's concerns.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. This included whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions. The union argued that certain provisions were unfair, including those related to pay rates, penalties for unauthorised absences, and the definition of a shift. The Commission had to weigh these objections against the overall fairness of the agreement and whether it was in the interests of the employees.

After considering the submissions from both parties and the evidence presented, the Commission found that the proposed enterprise agreement was fair and reasonable. The Commission held that the pay rates, penalties, and shift definitions were consistent with industry standards and did not disadvantage the employees. The union's objections were addressed through minor amendments to the agreement, which the Commission considered acceptable. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, finding that it met the necessary criteria for fairness and reasonableness.

The Commission's final order was that the Aruma Services (Employment) Enterprise Agreement 2025 be approved as a registered agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009, with the minor amendments incorporated. This decision was made in light of the overall fairness of the agreement and its alignment with industry standards, despite the union's objections.

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.