DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Carrowdore Pty Ltd as Trustees for Houston Unit Trust T/A Houston’s Farm
(AG2015/241)

HOUSTON’S FARM (PROCESSING OPERATIONS TASMANIA) - ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Tasmania
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 11 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the Houston’s Farm (Processing Operations Tasmania) - Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the Houston’s Farm (Processing Operations Tasmania) - Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Carrowdore Pty Ltd as Trustees for Houston Unit Trust T/A Houston’s Farm.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[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) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[6] The Agreement was approved on 11 March 2015 and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 18 March 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 June 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Carrowdore Pty Ltd as Trustees for Houston Unit Trust T/A Houston’s Farm, sought approval of the Houston’s Farm (Processing Operations Tasmania) - Enterprise Agreement 2015. The dispute arose in the Fair Work Commission, where the central issue was whether the proposed agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the respondent contested several provisions, claiming they were unfair and did not adequately protect employee interests.

The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement was a "better off overall test" (BOOT) agreement and whether it met the criteria of being "in the interests of the employees". This involved assessing the agreement's provisions against the relevant legislative standards and ensuring that it did not unfairly disadvantage employees. The Commission had to balance the need for a fair and efficient workplace with the rights and protections afforded to employees under the Fair Work Act.

In reaching its decision, the Commission found that the proposed agreement did indeed meet the BOOT criteria. It was determined that the agreement provided adequate protections and benefits to employees, while also accommodating the operational needs of the business. The Commission noted that while some provisions were contentious, they did not collectively render the agreement unfair. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, finding it to be fair and reasonable under the statutory framework.

The Commission's final order was that the Houston’s Farm (Processing Operations Tasmania) - Enterprise Agreement 2015 be approved, with specific terms and conditions as outlined in the agreement. This decision provided clarity and certainty for both the employer and employees, ensuring compliance with the Fair Work Act while facilitating a fair and efficient workplace.

Carrowdore Pty Ltd as Trustees for Houston Unit Trust T/A Houston’s Farm

DECISION

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established