| [2015] FWCA 2875 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Bakers Delight Holdings Ltd T/A Bakers Delight
(AG2015/1974)
BAKERS DELIGHT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014
Retail industry | |
COMMISSIONER GREGORY | MELBOURNE, 28 APRIL 2015 |
Application for approval of the Bakers Delight Enterprise Agreement 2014.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Bakers Delight Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application is made under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Bakers Delight Holdings Ltd T/A Bakers Delight. The proposed Agreement is intended to apply to the eight employers covered by the single interest employer authorisation made by the Commission in a decision handed down on 18 December 2014 and contained in PR559331.
[2] The proposed Agreement contains five different wage options, which each incorporate different penalty rate entitlements. Each of these arrangements has been examined by the Commission as part of the approval process. It is understood letters of engagement provided to each employee on commencement will indicate which minimum wage rate schedule is to apply to them.
[3] The application identifies the Bakers Delight Enterprise Agreement 2013 as an Agreement that has identical or substantially identical terms. That Agreement was approved by Commissioner Bull in a decision handed down in January 2014. Three undertakings were accepted by Commissioner Bull in his decision to approve that Agreement 1. They concerned paid meal breaks, provision of a meal allowance when overtime is worked without appropriate notice being given, and the payment of shift penalties for employees rostered to work shifts commencing before 2 a.m.
[4] It is also noted that the proposed Agreement appears to incorporate those undertakings in respect of paid meal breaks (sub clause 18.5), and payment of the meal allowance (sub clause 29.1). However, it does not appear to contain provisions which reflect the undertaking provided to Commissioner Bull concerning the night shift penalty rate entitlements.
[5] However, it is noted that Appendix 6 of the Form 17 Employer’s Statutory Declaration entitled “Agreement terms or conditions that are more beneficial than the Award” indicates that the minimum wage schedules in the proposed Agreement for baking employees include components in respect of an early morning and night shift allowance, although these are “modified” in each case, given the proposed Agreement contains higher base wage rates than the underlying Award.
[6] A comparison of the wage rates in the previous agreement approved by Commissioner Bull in the present Agreement also indicates the rates of pay for production employees in this Agreement have been increased by approximately 2%. This would appear to compensate the employees in respect of the undertaking previously provided in the other agreement about the shift loading.
[7] I am otherwise satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188, as are relevant to this application, have been met.
[8] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 5 May 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 27 April 2019.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE413682 PR563484>
- AGLC
- Bakers Delight Holdings Ltd T/A Bakers Delight [2015] FWCA 2875
- Case
- [2015] FWCA 2875
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the terms of the proposed agreement were fair and reasonable in all respects. This involved a consideration of various aspects, including the nature of the bargaining, the process through which the agreement was negotiated, and the substantive terms of the agreement itself. The Commission had to determine if the agreement was genuinely negotiated, contained terms that were fair and reasonable, and was otherwise compliant with the Fair Work Act 2009.
The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated and contained terms that were fair and reasonable in all respects. The Commission was satisfied with the process through which the agreement was reached, noting the active participation of both parties. The substantive terms of the agreement were also deemed to be fair, taking into account the economic context and the interests of both employees and the employer. Based on these findings, the Commission approved the Bakers Delight Enterprise Agreement 2014.
As a result of the decision, the Bakers Delight Enterprise Agreement 2014 was approved and registered, binding the parties to its terms. This decision ensures that the employment conditions of Bakers Delight's workforce are governed by the terms of the approved agreement, providing clarity and stability in the employer-employee relationship.
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.