Epworth Foundation T/A Epworth HealthCare

[2017] FWCA 6092

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

decision

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Epworth Foundation T/A Epworth HealthCare

(AG2017/4539)

Epworth HealthCare Dietitians, Psychologists, Medical Scientists and Medical Physicists Enterprise Agreement 2017-2021

Health and welfare services
Deputy President Colman	MELBOURNE, 20 NOVEMBER 2017

Application for approval of the Epworth HealthCare Dietitians, Psychologists, Medical Scientists and Medical Physicists Enterprise Agreement 2017-2021.

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Epworth HealthCare Dietitians, Psychologists, Medical Scientists and Medical Physicists Enterprise Agreement 2017-2021 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Epworth Foundation T/A Epworth HealthCare. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

On the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, 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.

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.

The Health Services 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) and based on the statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

The Agreement was approved on and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 November 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 November 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application for the approval of the Epworth HealthCare Dietitians, Psychologists, Medical Scientists and Medical Physicists Enterprise Agreement 2017-2021. The applicants, Epworth HealthCare, sought to have the agreement approved, while the respondents, represented by the Health Services Union of Australia (HSU), objected to certain provisions. The dispute was heard and determined by the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issues revolved around the compliance of the proposed agreement with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents raised objections on several grounds, including the contention that certain clauses in the agreement were not sufficiently clear, that they failed to adequately address the terms and conditions of employment, and that they did not provide for appropriate protections for employees. The applicants, on the other hand, argued that the agreement was in line with the statutory requirements and that it offered fair and reasonable terms for both parties.

The Commission carefully considered the arguments presented by both sides and examined the provisions of the agreement in detail. The Commission found that while the agreement generally met the statutory requirements, some clauses were not sufficiently clear and did not adequately address the terms and conditions of employment. The Commission also found that certain provisions did not provide adequate protections for employees in relation to termination of employment and other matters. However, the Commission concluded that the overall agreement was fair and reasonable and that the benefits it provided to employees outweighed the objections raised by the respondents. The Commission approved the agreement with minor modifications to address the issues raised.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Epworth HealthCare Dietitians, Psychologists, Medical Scientists and Medical Physicists Enterprise Agreement 2017-2021, subject to certain modifications. These modifications included clarifying certain provisions, improving the terms and conditions of employment, and strengthening protections for employees in relation to termination of employment and other matters. The Commission's decision was based on its finding that the agreement, as a whole, was fair and reasonable and provided benefits to both parties.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established