DECISION

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

Department of Agriculture and Water Resources
(AG2017/2414)

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND WATER RESOURCES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017-20

Australian Capital Territory
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 19 JULY 2017

Application for approval of the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources Enterprise Agreement 2017-20.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources Enterprise Agreement 2017-20 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] 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.

[3] The CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union and the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia being a bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 26 July 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 25 July 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources, which sought approval for the Enterprise Agreement 2017-20. The application was lodged with the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary legal standards for approval. The Commission's role was to ensure that the agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009 and other relevant legislation, and that it was fair and reasonable in its terms.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided for minimum rates of pay, conditions of employment, and dispute resolution mechanisms that were in line with the legislative requirements. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement was negotiated in good faith and whether it included any provisions that were contrary to public policy or unfair to employees. Additionally, the Commission needed to assess whether the agreement contained any terms that could potentially lead to discrimination or undermine the rights of workers.

The Fair Work Commission found that the Enterprise Agreement 2017-20 was fair and reasonable in its terms. The Commission concluded that the agreement met all the necessary legal criteria and was negotiated in good faith. The agreement was approved, providing certainty and stability for both the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources and its employees. The Commission's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the agreement's provisions, taking into account the specific needs and circumstances of the department and its workforce. The Commission also noted that the agreement included appropriate mechanisms for resolving disputes and ensuring that employees' rights were protected.

Department of Agriculture and Water Resources

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established