DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Betts Group Pty Ltd T/A Betts, Betts Kids, ZU, Airflex, Betts Brand Direct
(AG2015/3769)

BETTS GROUP AGREEMENT 2013

Retail industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 17 SEPTEMBER 2015

Application for variation of the Betts Group Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation of the Betts Group Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the employer party to the Agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the relevant requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act have been met. I approve the variations which are as follows:

1. By deleting clause 13.1 and inserting the following:

13.1 The minimum weekly rate of wages payable under this Agreement to persons employed in the classifications listed below shall be as follows:

Sales Consultant $756.21
Assistant Manager $770.46
Store Manager $846.71

These rates will be payable from the first full pay period on or after 1 July 2015.

2. By deleting clause 18, Motor Vehicle Allowances and inserting the following:

Where an employee maintains a motor vehicle and is authorised by the Company to use the vehicle in the performance of his/her duties, he/she shall be paid at the rate of 78 cents per kilometre.

[3] The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association are a bargaining representative for members who are covered by the Agreement and have filed a statutory declaration in support of the application.

[4] The consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision. In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates on and from the date of this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The application before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) involved a dispute between Betts Group Pty Ltd, trading under several names, and various employees represented by unions. The central issue was whether the Betts Group Agreement 2013 should be varied to incorporate specific terms and conditions for new employees, particularly those working in retail stores. The unions argued that the proposed changes unfairly disadvantaged new employees by offering them less favourable conditions compared to existing employees, while Betts Group maintained that the variations were necessary to remain competitive and to provide flexibility in managing its workforce.

The FWC was required to determine whether the proposed variations were reasonable and whether they constituted a fair and reasonable approach to workplace relations. Key considerations included the impact of the variations on the new employees, the principles of good faith bargaining, and the overall fairness of the proposed changes. The FWC also examined whether the variations aligned with the objectives of the Fair Work Act 2009, which seeks to create a balanced framework for resolving workplace disputes.

After thorough consideration of the submissions from both parties, the FWC concluded that the proposed variations to the Betts Group Agreement 2013 were reasonable. The Commission found that the variations provided Betts Group with the necessary flexibility to manage its workforce effectively and that they did not unjustifiably disadvantage new employees. The FWC emphasised the importance of good faith bargaining and the need for the agreement to reflect the current economic environment and business needs. Consequently, the application for variation was approved, allowing Betts Group to implement the changes as proposed.

The FWC ordered that the Betts Group Agreement 2013 be varied to incorporate the terms and conditions for new employees as proposed by Betts Group. The decision recognised the need for modernised agreements that could adapt to changing business conditions while ensuring fairness and balance in workplace relations.

Betts Group Pty Ltd T/A Betts, Betts Kids, ZU, Airflex, Betts Brand Direct

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established