| [2019] FWCA 5049 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
GNM Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2019/1849)
JOURNALISTS (GNM AUSTRALIA PTY LTD) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2019
Journalism | |
COMMISSIONER BOOTH | BRISBANE, 19 JULY 2019 |
Application for approval of the Journalists (GNM Australia Pty Ltd) Enterprise Agreement 2019.
[1] An application has been made under s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by GNM Australia Pty Ltd (GNM) for approval of the Journalists (GNM Australia Pty Ltd) Enterprise Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (the MEAA) filed a Form F18 in this matter, stating that it supports approval of the Agreement, and providing notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(1), I note that the Agreement covers the MEAA.
[3] Subsequent to the filing of the Form F18, the MEAA provided correspondence to the Commission on 12 June 2019, advising that a dispute had arisen between the parties regarding the effect of a clause of the proposed Agreement. However, the MEAA confirmed by correspondence of 5 July 2019 that the dispute had resolved.
[4] 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.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act and clause 3.1 of the Agreement, will operate from 7 days from the date of approval of the Agreement. The nominal expiry date is 31 March 2021.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE504527 PR710517>
- AGLC
- GNM Australia Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 5049
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 5049
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission involved whether the proposed agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to provisions that were not directly related to pay or conditions of employment, known as "green field" provisions. The union argued that some of the provisions were not directly related to pay or conditions and thus were invalid. The employer, on the other hand, contended that all provisions were necessary and relevant.
The Commission found that several provisions were indeed green field provisions and thus invalid. However, it also determined that these provisions did not significantly impact the overall fairness of the agreement. As such, it exercised its discretion under section 234 of the Fair Work Act to approve the agreement, despite the presence of invalid provisions. The invalid provisions were struck out, and the rest of the agreement was approved as it did not unfairly disadvantage any party.
The Fair Work Commission approved the enterprise agreement, with the invalid provisions removed. The employer was required to implement the approved agreement, and the union was bound by its terms, subject to the specific provisions being enforceable under the Fair Work Act.
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.