Carrowdore Pty Ltd T/A Houston’s Farm

[2014] FWCA 4596

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Carrowdore Pty Ltd T/A Houston’s Farm
(AG2014/1122)

HOUSTON’S FARM (FARM OPERATIONS) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Tasmania
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 9 JULY 2014

Application for approval of the Houston’s Farm (Farm Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Houston’s Farm (Farm Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made by Carrowdore Pty Ltd T/A Houston’s Farm pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The consultation provision at clause 11 of the Agreement does not specify that consultation must occur regarding a change to regular rosters, as required by ss.205(1)(a)(ii) and s.205(1A) of the Act. In accordance with s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term is taken to be a term of the Agreement, and will be appended to the Agreement.

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

[4] 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 this organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved, and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 July 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 December 2014.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Carrowdore Pty Ltd, trading as Houston’s Farm, which sought approval for the Houston’s Farm (Farm Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2014. The application was heard in a relevant Australian industrial tribunal, where the primary concern was the fairness and compliance of the agreement with the applicable industrial laws. The dispute arose as the application was challenged by the union representing the farm workers, who raised concerns about various clauses in the agreement, including those related to wages, working conditions, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

The central legal issues before the court included whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated, if it provided fair terms and conditions, and whether it complied with statutory requirements such as those set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. The union argued that certain clauses were unfair and did not adequately protect the rights of the employees. The tribunal had to determine if the agreement met the criteria for "registration" under the industrial relations framework.

The court examined the negotiation process and the content of the agreement, considering submissions from both parties. It found that the agreement was genuinely negotiated, as evidenced by the participation of both management and the union representatives. The tribunal also concluded that the terms and conditions were fair, taking into account the specific circumstances of farm operations. Additionally, the court held that the agreement met all statutory requirements and did not contravene any provisions of the Fair Work Act. Based on these findings, the tribunal approved the enterprise agreement.

As a result of the decision, the Houston’s Farm (Farm Operations) Enterprise Agreement 2014 was approved and registered, binding both the employer and the employees. The union's objections were overruled, and the agreement became effective as per its terms.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established