DECISION

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

Hirondelle Private Hospital Pty Ltd T/A Hirondelle Private Hospital
(AG2015/3775)

HIRONDELLE PRIVATE HOSPITAL

Health and welfare services
COMMISSIONER SIMPSON	BRISBANE, 17 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Hirondelle Private Hospital and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Hirondelle Private Hospital and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017 (the Agreement). The Application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Hirondelle Private Hospital. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The New South Wales Nurses and Midwives’ Association and New South Wales Branch of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation being a bargaining representative 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) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with s.54 of the Act. The nominal expiry date is 30 July 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hirondelle Private Hospital Pty Ltd, trading as Hirondelle Private Hospital, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2015-2017. The hospital sought the Commission's approval of the agreement to be registered and to be able to operate under the terms and conditions set out within it. The application was opposed by the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association NSW Private Hospitals Group, which argued that certain provisions of the agreement were contrary to public policy.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement contained terms that were contrary to public policy and whether the agreement should be approved for registration. The Commission needed to determine whether certain provisions of the agreement, particularly those related to the hospital's ability to impose certain conditions on employees, were contrary to public policy. The Commission also needed to consider whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment and whether it met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The Commission found that certain provisions of the agreement were contrary to public policy, including provisions that allowed the hospital to impose certain conditions on employees that were not in the employees' best interests. However, the Commission also found that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment and met the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission approved the agreement for registration, subject to certain modifications to remove the provisions that were found to be contrary to public policy. The Commission also made orders to ensure that the agreement would operate in a manner that was consistent with the public interest.

The final orders made by the Commission included the registration of the agreement, subject to the modifications made by the Commission, and the removal of certain provisions found to be contrary to public policy. The Commission also made orders to ensure that the agreement would operate in a manner that was consistent with the public interest, including orders relating to the hospital's ability to impose certain conditions on employees. The Commission's decision provides guidance to employers and employees on the types of provisions that may be contrary to public policy and highlights the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements are fair and reasonable.

Hirondelle Private Hospital Pty Ltd T/A Hirondelle Private Hospital

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established