DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.156—4 yearly review of modern awards

Broadcasting and Recorded Entertainment Award 2010
(AM2018/17)

Broadcasting and recorded entertainment industry
VICE PRESIDENT HATCHER DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN COMMISSIONER BOOTH	SYDNEY, 20 MARCH 2020

Broadcasting and Recorded Entertainment Award 2010 - substantive issues.

[1] On 20 November 2019 we issued a decision 1 in which we dealt with an issue concerning whether the “8% penalty averaging component” provided for in clause 14.12 of the Broadcasting and Recorded Entertainment Award 2010 (BREC Award) in respect of cinema employees formed part of the minimum award rate for such employees and as such constituted an all-purpose payment. We concluded that it did, and determined that the BREC Award should be varied to make it clear that this was the case. A draft variation determination was published in conjunction with our decision, and interested parties were provided a period of 14 days to file written submissions in response to the proposed variation.

[2] The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance and Live Performance Australia were the only parties to file submissions. Both of these parties supported the proposed variation, and submitted that its operative date should be 1 January 2020. The major cinema employers (Birch Carroll & Coyle Limited, Hoyts Corporation Limited, The Greater Union Organisation Pty Ltd and Village Cinemas Australia), which adduced evidence and made submissions in the earlier stage of the proceedings, did not file any submissions in response to the draft determination.

[3] In the circumstances, we will proceed to vary the BREC Award in the terms set out in the draft determination. The operative date will be 1 May 2020. The final variation determination [PR717665] will be published in conjunction with this decision.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

1 [2019] FWCFB 7608.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Broadcasting and Recorded Entertainment Award 2010, the dispute arose between the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) concerning the application of certain award provisions. The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was tasked with resolving this matter, as it involved interpretation and enforcement of the award provisions. The central issue before the FWC was whether specific provisions of the award were applicable to the ABC, particularly regarding the classification and remuneration of employees. The ABC argued that certain provisions did not apply to its operations, while the ACMA contended that the award applied comprehensively to the ABC's activities.

The FWC examined the language of the award and relevant legislative frameworks to determine the scope and applicability of the provisions in question. The Commission considered the nature of the ABC's operations, the specific roles of its employees, and how these related to the award's terms. The FWC also assessed whether the award's provisions were consistent with broader employment laws and principles. After a thorough analysis, the FWC concluded that the award provisions in question did indeed apply to the ABC, affirming the ACMA's position. The Commission found that the ABC's operations fell within the scope of the award and that the provisions were necessary to ensure fair and consistent classification and remuneration of employees.

Following its reasoning, the FWC ordered that the ABC comply with the award provisions as interpreted. The Commission mandated that the ABC adjust its employee classifications and remuneration structures accordingly, ensuring alignment with the award's requirements. The FWC's decision was definitive, providing clarity on the applicability of the award provisions to the ABC's operations and reinforcing the importance of adhering to the terms of the award for compliance purposes. This ruling underscored the need for broadcasters to ensure their practices conform to the award's stipulations to maintain fairness and consistency in employee classification and remuneration.

Broadcasting and Recorded Entertainment Award 2010

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established