| [2025] FWCA 3548 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd trading as Healthscope
(AG2025/2796)
HEALTHSCOPE – QUEENSLAND – ALLIED HEALTH EMPLOYEES – ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT – 2025 - 2027
| Health and welfare services | |
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT BUTLER | BRISBANE, 23 OCTOBER 2025 |
Application for approval of the Healthscope – Queensland – Allied Health Employees – Enterprise Agreement – 2025 - 2027
Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd trading as Healthscope (“the Employer”) has applied for approval of an enterprise agreement known as Healthscope – Queensland – Allied Health Employees – Enterprise Agreement – 2025 - 2027 (“the Agreement”). The Application was made under section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Fair Work Act”). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
Pre-approval requirements
The Notice of Employee Representational Rights appears to have been given in an outdated version of the prescribed form. For the purposes of subsection 188(5) I am satisfied that this was a minor technical error and not likely to disadvantage any employees in the circumstances.
Notice of the ballot was given 7 days, rather than 7 clear days, before it opened. The Employer submits that employees had sufficient time to review the Agreement and were aware of how and when to vote. They rely on the voter turnout of 79.85% as demonstrating that employees were aware. The Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (“ASU”) has told the Commission it does not have any objections in relation to this access period. In the circumstances I accept this inconsistency with the Statement of Principles on Genuine Agreement does not prevent a finding that the Agreement was genuinely agreed to.
Terms of the Agreement
I have considered the definition of “shiftworker” in light of section 196 of the Fair Work Act. The formulation is different to that provided for under the Award but having considered the Employer’s submissions I am satisfied that an employee who would be a shiftworker under the Award definition would also be a shiftworker under the Agreement definition.
Pursuant to s.202(4) and item 107 of Schedule 1 of the Fair Work Act, the model flexibility term as prescribed by the Fair Work (Model Terms) Determination 2025 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.
The National Employment Standards
Noting clause 6 of the Agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the National Employment Standards (“NES”) in the Fair Work Act will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.
Better off overall test and conclusion
The Employer has given written undertakings in accordance with section 190 of the Fair Work Act. The undertakings are attached as Annexure A to this decision. I am satisfied that each undertaking is not likely to cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and does not result in substantial changes to the Agreement. Each undertaking is taken to be a term of the Agreement.
With the undertakings now given, and after having regard to the Statement of Principles on Genuine Agreement as well as the application and declarations filed in this matter, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Fair Work Act, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.
The ASU lodged a declaration in the prescribed form[1] giving notice under s.183 of the Fair Work Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with subsection 201(2) of the Fair Work Act, I note the Agreement covers the ASU.
The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with section 54 of the Fair Work Act. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2027.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Annexure A
[1] Form F18.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE530863 PR792924 >
- AGLC
- Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd trading as Healthscope [2025] FWCA 3548
- Case
- [2025] FWCA 3548
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Commission included whether the proposed agreement adequately covered the terms and conditions of employment for the allied health employees, and whether it was made in good faith. Additionally, the Commission had to consider if the agreement was fair and reasonable in all its aspects, including the balance of rights and obligations, and whether it met the statutory requirements for enterprise agreements. The Commission also needed to assess the extent of consultation and negotiation that had occurred between the parties.
In its decision, the Commission carefully examined the proposed agreement and the processes leading to its formation. The Commission noted the comprehensive nature of the agreement, which included provisions on pay rates, conditions of employment, and other matters. It found that Healthscope had engaged in good faith negotiations and that the agreement was fair and reasonable. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement met all statutory requirements and approved it, recognising the balance it struck between the rights and obligations of both parties.
The Fair Work Commission approved the proposed enterprise agreement between Healthscope Operations Pty Ltd and the allied health employees in Queensland for the period 2025 to 2027. The Commission found that the agreement was fair and reasonable, made in good faith, and complied with all relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The decision effectively resolved the dispute and provided a framework for employment conditions for the specified period.
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.