Consolidated Property Services (Australia) Pty Ltd

Case [2014] FWCA 9432


[2014] FWCA 9432
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Consolidated Property Services (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2014/10642)

CONSOLIDATED PROPERTY SERVICES AUSTRALIA AND UNITED VOICE CLEAN START UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT (VICTORIA) 2013

Cleaning services

COMMISSIONER GREGORY

MELBOURNE, 24 DECEMBER 2014

Application for approval of the Consolidated Property Services Australia and United Voice Clean Start Union Collective Agreement (Victoria) 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Consolidated Property Services Australia and United Voice Clean Start Union Collective Agreement (Victoria) 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Consolidated Property Services (Australia) Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] It is noted, firstly, that the wage rates and other conditions contained in the Agreement are generally well in advance of those contained in the reference instrument, the Cleaning Services Award 2010. No issues have been identified in regard to satisfaction with the requirements of the “better off overall” test.

[3] The Agreement also contains a bonus payment for employees employed between 1 July 2013 and 30 June 2014, which takes effect from the date of approval of the Agreement. However, other provisions concerning increases in wage rates, the rights and obligations of union delegates, and the arrangements to apply to the engagement of labour hire employees or subcontractors, come into operation when similar agreements are entered into and approved by the Commission with other named cleaning contractors. This is intended to protect the Applicant from being placed in a commercial or financial disadvantage compared to those businesses. It is also noted that other Agreements containing similar provisions have been approved by the Commission in the past on several occasions.

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

[5] United Voice, 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 is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 31 December 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 December 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE412018  PR559562>

Details
AGLC
Consolidated Property Services (Australia) Pty Ltd [2014] FWCA 9432
Case
[2014] FWCA 9432
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Consolidated Property Services (Australia) Pty Ltd sought approval for the Consolidated Property Services Australia and United Voice Clean Start Union Collective Agreement (Victoria) 2013. The union, United Voice Clean Start Union, contested the application on the basis that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred around several provisions within the agreement, including those related to the classification of employees, wages, and other employment conditions.

The legal issues before the Commission involved the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically whether the provisions of the collective agreement complied with the statutory requirements. The union argued that certain clauses within the agreement were inconsistent with the Act, particularly regarding the classification of employees and the payment of wages. The company, on the other hand, contended that the agreement was fair and reasonable, and that it adhered to the legislative framework.

After reviewing the arguments presented by both parties, the Commission determined that several clauses within the agreement were indeed inconsistent with the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission found that the classification of employees and the wage provisions did not comply with the requirements of the Act. As a result, the application for approval of the collective agreement was dismissed. The Commission directed the parties to negotiate a revised agreement that would be compliant with the statutory provisions.

The final orders of the Commission included a direction for the parties to commence further negotiations to reach a new collective agreement that would meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission also noted that the parties could seek its assistance in resolving any issues that arose during the negotiation process.

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.