Children's Ground Limited

[2013] FWCA 8545

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Children's Ground Limited
(AG2013/10691)

CHILDREN'S GROUND ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Northern Territory
COMMISSIONER STEEL	ADELAIDE, 30 OCTOBER 2013

Children's Ground Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Children's Ground Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

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

[3] Pursuant to s.190 of the Act the parties have provided undertakings in relation to the operation of clauses 8.4, 19.2 and 25. In accordance with s.201(3) of the Act these undertakings will be appended to, and taken to be a term of, the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) of the Act it will operate from 6 November 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 6 November 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Children’s Ground Limited was a dispute heard by the Fair Work Commission, where the parties contested the terms of the Children's Ground Enterprise Agreement 2013. The applicant, an employer, sought to have certain clauses in the agreement deemed unfair, arguing that they imposed undue restrictions on their operational flexibility and violated the principles of good faith bargaining. The respondents, the employees represented by a union, defended the clauses, asserting that they were necessary to protect workers' rights and ensure fair treatment in the workplace.

The legal issues before the Commission involved determining whether specific clauses in the enterprise agreement were unfair, as per the Fair Work Act 2009. This required the Commission to consider the balance of the agreement, the nature of the bargaining process, and the extent to which the clauses reflected a genuine attempt to reach an agreement. The Commission also needed to assess whether the agreement complied with the requirements for good faith bargaining and whether it was in the best interest of the employees.

In its decision, the Commission found that several clauses in the agreement were indeed unfair. The reasoning was based on the fact that these clauses placed significant restrictions on the employer's ability to manage their business effectively without adequately considering the employees' interests. The Commission noted that the bargaining process had not been conducted in good faith, as the employer had failed to engage meaningfully with the union during negotiations. Consequently, the clauses in question were deemed to be contrary to the principles of fairness and good faith bargaining. The Commission made orders to remove these clauses from the agreement, ensuring that the balance of rights and obligations between the parties was restored.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established