| [2016] FWCA 5540 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Berkeley Challenge Proprietary Limited T/A Spotless
(AG2016/1574)
SPOTLESS (BLUESCOPE STEEL) AWU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015-2018
Cleaning services | |
COMMISSIONER LEE | MELBOURNE, 9 AUGUST 2016 |
Application for approval of the Spotless (BlueScope Steel) AWU Collective Agreement 2015-2018.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Spotless (BlueScope Steel) AWU Collective Agreement 2015-2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Berkeley Challenge Proprietary Limited T/A Spotless. 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.
[3] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.
[4] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.
[5] The Australian Workers’ Union 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.
[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 August 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 June 2018.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE420445 PR583951>
- AGLC
- Berkeley Challenge Proprietary Limited T/A Spotless [2016] FWCA 5540
- Case
- [2016] FWCA 5540
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court involved whether the proposed agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to the minimum entitlements, and whether it met the requirements for a modern award. The court had to consider whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms, and if it was consistent with the objects of the Act, which include promoting high levels of economic growth and employment.
The Fair Work Commission examined the agreement in detail, assessing it against the legislative framework and the principles of modern awards. The Commission found that the proposed agreement was largely consistent with the objects of the Act and provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. The Commission concluded that the agreement met the requirements for a modern award and approved it, noting the importance of the agreement in providing certainty and stability for employees in the industry. The approval of the agreement was made subject to certain conditions to ensure ongoing compliance with the Act.
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.