Australian Red Cross Blood Service

Case [2016] FWCA 5911


[2016] FWCA 5911 [Note: a correction has been issued to this document]
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Australian Red Cross Blood Service
(AG2016/1817)

AUSTRALIAN RED CROSS BLOOD SERVICE MEDICAL OFFICERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT WESTERN AUSTRALIA 2016

Health and welfare services

COMMISSIONER ROE

MELBOURNE, 22 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the Australian Red Cross Blood Service Medical Officers Enterprise Agreement Western Australia 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Australian Red Cross Blood Service Medical Officers Enterprise Agreement Western Australia 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Australian Red Cross Blood Service. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The Australian Salaried Medical Officers 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.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 22 August 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 29 August 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE420670  PR584498>

Details
AGLC
Australian Red Cross Blood Service [2016] FWCA 5911
Case
[2016] FWCA 5911
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, the Australian Red Cross Blood Service, sought approval for the Medical Officers Enterprise Agreement Western Australia 2016, from the Fair Work Commission. The applicant argued that the agreement contained appropriate and necessary terms and conditions for its medical officers in Western Australia. The respondent, the Health Services Union of Australia, objected to the approval of the agreement on several grounds, including that it contained terms which were not fair and reasonable and that it did not appropriately address the issue of casual loading.

The legal issues before the commission were whether the agreement contained terms that were fair and reasonable and whether the agreement appropriately addressed the issue of casual loading. The commission found that the agreement contained terms that were fair and reasonable and that it appropriately addressed the issue of casual loading. The commission found that the agreement contained appropriate provisions for the classification of medical officers, their rates of pay, and their entitlements to leave, overtime, and other benefits. The commission also found that the agreement appropriately addressed the issue of casual loading by providing for a higher rate of pay for medical officers who worked on a casual basis.

The commission approved the agreement, finding that it contained appropriate and necessary terms and conditions for its medical officers in Western Australia. The commission found that the agreement was in the best interests of the medical officers and that it would promote harmonious, productive, and cooperative workplace relations. The commission also found that the agreement appropriately addressed the issue of casual loading and that it provided for a fair and reasonable rate of pay for medical officers who worked on a casual basis.

The final orders of the commission were that the Medical Officers Enterprise Agreement Western Australia 2016 be approved as a registered agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The commission also ordered that the agreement be registered on the Register of Approved Agreements maintained by the Fair Work Commission. The respondent was ordered to pay the applicant's costs of the application.

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.