DECISION

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

Independent Education Union of Australia
(AG2015/2936)

ROZELLE CHILD CARE CENTRE LTD EMPLOYEE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015

Children's services
VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI	SYDNEY, 3 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Rozelle Child Care Centre Ltd Employee Collective Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Rozelle Child Care Centre Ltd Employee Collective Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the 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 10 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2017.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved the Independent Education Union of Australia, as the applicant, seeking approval for the Rozelle Child Care Centre Ltd Employee Collective Agreement 2015. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment for the employees of Rozelle Child Care Centre Ltd, specifically the proposed agreement's provisions regarding pay rates, conditions of employment, and the classification of employees. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over such employment-related disputes in Australia.

The primary legal issues the Commission had to resolve were whether the proposed agreement complied with the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to the provisions that were outside the scope of the agreement, and whether the agreement met the requirements for "modern awards" and "unregistered agreements." The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement complied with the "better off overall test" and if the agreement was made in good faith and without coercion. Additionally, the Commission had to determine whether the agreement contained any provisions that would have an adverse effect on employees' health and safety.

In delivering its decision, the Commission found that the proposed agreement did not comply with certain provisions of the Fair Work Act. The Commission identified that the agreement contained terms outside its scope, which were not permissible under the legislation. The Commission also found that the agreement did not meet the requirements for a "modern award" and "unregistered agreement." Furthermore, the Commission determined that the agreement failed the "better off overall test" as it did not provide employees with improved terms and conditions of employment compared to their existing entitlements. The Commission concluded that the agreement was not made in good faith and without coercion, as there was evidence of pressure on employees to accept the agreement. Finally, the Commission found that the agreement did not adequately address employees' health and safety concerns.

The Fair Work Commission did not grant approval for the proposed agreement. The Commission's decision was based on the agreement's failure to comply with the Fair Work Act, its inability to meet the requirements for a "modern award" and "unregistered agreement," the lack of compliance with the "better off overall test," and concerns regarding the agreement's impact on employees' health and safety. The Commission's decision highlighted the importance of ensuring that employment agreements adhere to the relevant legislation and provide fair and equitable terms and conditions for employees.

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