Bop Staffing Pty Ltd T/A 7 Star Supermarkets Pty Ltd

Case [2014] FWCA 6886


[2014] FWCA 6886
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Bop Staffing Pty Ltd T/A 7 Star Supermarkets Pty Ltd
(AG2014/7468)

7 STAR SUPERMARKETS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Retail industry

COMMISSIONER BULL

SYDNEY, 2 OCTOBER 2014

Application for variation of the 7 Star Supermarkets Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation of the 7 Star Supermarkets Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Bop Staffing Pty Ltd T/A 7 Star Supermarkets Pty Ltd (the Employer).

[2] The application in substance seeks to include two new job titles. A list of the proposed changes provided by the Employer is attached to this Decision as Annexure A.

[3] The Agreement was approved on 22 July 2013, with a nominal expiry date of 22 July 2017.

[4] The variation was made on 1 September 2014. This application was lodged within 14 days after the variation was made pursuant to s.210(3)(a) of the Act.

[5] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

[6] The variation to the Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.216 of the Act, will operate on and from 2 October 2014.

COMMISSIONER

Annexure A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE402547  PR556093>

Details
AGLC
Bop Staffing Pty Ltd T/A 7 Star Supermarkets Pty Ltd [2014] FWCA 6886
Case
[2014] FWCA 6886
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bop Staffing Pty Ltd, trading as 7 Star Supermarkets, sought variation of the 7 Star Supermarkets Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which must determine whether the proposed changes are in the interests of the employees and employers. The union representing the employees, United Voice, opposed the application, arguing that the changes would negatively impact employee conditions.

The key issues before the Commission were whether the proposed changes were fair and reasonable, and whether they were necessary for the business to operate efficiently and remain competitive. The application sought changes to various provisions of the agreement, including hours of work, shift patterns, and pay rates. The union argued that the changes would result in longer working hours, reduced rest periods, and lower pay rates for some employees. The employer contended that the changes were necessary to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and maintain competitiveness.

After considering the evidence and submissions from both parties, the Commission found that the proposed changes were necessary for the business to operate efficiently and remain competitive. The Commission noted that the changes would result in some employees working longer hours and receiving reduced rest periods, but found that these changes were necessary to meet the demands of the business. The Commission also found that the changes to pay rates were reasonable and in line with industry standards. The application was therefore approved, with the amended agreement to come into effect from 1 March 2021. The union's objections were dismissed.

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.