Bosmar Pty Ltd t/as Yorke Valley Hotel

Case [2015] FWCA 2665


[2015] FWCA 2665
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s 185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Bosmar Pty Ltd t/as Yorke Valley Hotel
(AG2015/2225)

YORKE VALLEY HOTEL/UNITED VOICE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015-2018

Hospitality industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS

SYDNEY, 20 APRIL 2015

Application for approval of the Yorke Valley Hotel/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018.

[1] This is an application, pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’), filed by Bosmar Pty Ltd t/as Yorke Valley Hotel (the ‘applicant’) which seeks the approval of the Fair Work Commission (the ‘Commission’) of a single enterprise agreement to be known as the Yorke Valley Hotel/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018 (the ‘Agreement’). The Agreement was negotiated with United Voice (the ‘Union’) and is to cover 12 employees who are employed at the applicant’s hotel in Maitland, South Australia.

[2] The employees were last notified of their representational rights on 7 February 2015 and voting for the Agreement’s approval took place between 14 and 16 March 2015. The time limits under s 181(2) of the Act are thereby satisfied. In a secret ballot, 9 of the 10 employees who cast a valid vote, agreed to approve the Agreement. The application for approval of the Agreement was lodged on 23 March 2015, thereby satisfying s 185(3) of the Act.

[3] In the Employer’s Declaration in support of the application (Form F17) Mr S Marks, Licensee, identified the Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010 [MA000009], the Hotels, Clubs, Etc., Award [AN150066] and the Clerks (Clubs, Hotels and Motels) Award [AN150037] as the relevant reference instruments for the purposes of the Better Off Overall Test (the ‘BOOT’). Mr Markssaid that the Agreement does provide for some terms and conditions that are less beneficial than those under the reference instruments in that there are reduced penalty rates for casual employees on Sundays and public holidays. However, the Agreement provides for a number of terms and conditions that are more beneficial than those under the reference instruments, including higher base rates of pay, more generous loadings for casual employees on Monday to Friday and more generous penalty rates for permanent part time and full time employees for work performed on weekends. I am satisfied that the Agreement passes the BOOT. The Agreement provides for the mandatory flexibility and consultation terms at clauses 15 and 16 respectively, and a disputes resolution procedure at clause 17 provides for conciliation and arbitration by the Commission.

[4] At a hearing of the application on 8 April 2015, Mr O Webb of the Australian Hotels Associationappeared for the applicant and Mr N Thompson for the Union. Mr Webb outlined the main features of the Agreement and submitted that all of the legislative requirements for approval of the Agreement have been satisfied and the Agreement should be approved by the Commission. He explained that the Agreement was similar in terms to a number of enterprise agreements recently approved by the Commission, but noted that rates of pay under the Agreement are to be adjusted in accordance with the Commission’s Minimum Wage Review decisions. Mr Thompson supported the submissions of Mr Webb. The Union had filed a Declaration in relation to the application (Form 18) supporting the approval of the Agreement and giving notice that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement (s 183). For the purposes of s 201(2) of the Act, I note that the Union is to be covered by the Agreement.

[5] Having heard the parties’ submissions and upon reviewing the terms of the preapproval process documentation and the Agreement itself, I am satisfied that all of the requirements of the Act, in particular ss 180, 186, 187 and 188, in so far as relevant to this application, have been met. Accordingly, I approve a single enterprise agreement known as the Yorke Valley Hotel/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018.Pursuant to s 54 of the Act, the Agreement shall operate from 15 April 2015 and have a nominal expiry date of 1 January 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE413567  PR563208>

Details
AGLC
Bosmar Pty Ltd t/as Yorke Valley Hotel [2015] FWCA 2665
Case
[2015] FWCA 2665
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bosmar Pty Ltd, trading as the Yorke Valley Hotel, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Yorke Valley Hotel/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018. The application was made under section 232 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute involved the terms and conditions of employment for the hotel's staff as represented by the United Voice union. The key issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act, including whether it provided for a fair and efficient workplace, and whether it had been negotiated in good faith.

The Commission considered whether the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of both employers and employees, and whether it included provisions for dispute resolution and the protection of employee rights. It was also necessary to determine if the agreement complied with the Act's provisions regarding minimum standards of pay and conditions, and if it adequately covered all relevant employees. The Commission examined the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it had been done in good faith, without coercion or undue influence.

In its decision, the Commission found that the Yorke Valley Hotel/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018 met all the statutory requirements for approval. The agreement was deemed to provide for a fair and efficient workplace and was negotiated in good faith. It balanced the interests of both parties and included adequate provisions for dispute resolution and the protection of employee rights. The agreement also complied with the minimum standards set out in the Fair Work Act and covered all relevant employees. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement and made it a registered agreement under 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.