DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Independent Education Union of Australia
(AG2017/5592)

ROSEWOOD AND DISTRICT KINDERGARTEN AND PRESCHOOL EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Educational services
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC	CANBERRA, 13 DECEMBER 2017

Application for approval of the Rosewood and District Kindergarten and Preschool Early Childhood Education Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Rosewood and District Kindergarten and Preschool Early Childhood Education Enterprise Agreement 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Independent Education Union of Australia. 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 Independent Education Union of Australia 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) 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 20 December 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2020.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, the Independent Education Union of Australia, sought approval of the Rosewood and District Kindergarten and Preschool Early Childhood Education Enterprise Agreement 2017. The application was made under the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents, including the employer, sought to have the application dismissed on the basis that the agreement did not meet the requirements for approval. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian industrial relations tribunal.

The central legal issue was whether the agreement contained terms that did not comply with the Fair Work Act. The respondents argued that certain provisions of the agreement did not meet the legislative requirements for approval, including the absence of certain mandated minimum entitlements and the inclusion of terms that were inconsistent with the Act. The applicant argued that the agreement was valid and should be approved as it met all the necessary criteria.

The Commission found that while the agreement was largely compliant, certain terms did not meet the requirements of the Act. Specifically, the agreement did not include mandated minimum entitlements for certain employees and contained terms that were inconsistent with the Act. The Commission noted that the agreement was otherwise fair and balanced, and that the parties had negotiated in good faith. However, the Commission determined that the non-compliant terms were significant enough to warrant dismissal of the application. The Commission approved the agreement with certain modifications to address the non-compliant terms.

The Commission ordered that the agreement be approved with modifications to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act. The modifications included the addition of mandated minimum entitlements and the removal of inconsistent terms. The Commission also ordered that the modified agreement be registered with the Fair Work Commission. The respondents were directed to take all necessary steps to implement the modified agreement and to provide the applicant with a copy of the modified agreement.

Independent Education Union of Australia

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established