DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd T/A ISS Facility Services
(AG2015/6314)

ISS FACILITY SERVICES GROUNDS DIVISION ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Gardening services
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 15 DECEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the ISS Facility Services Grounds Division Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the ISS Facility Services Grounds Division Enterprise 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 ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd T/A ISS Facility Services. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 15 December 2015 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 22 December 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the applicant, ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd, trading as ISS Facility Services, applied for the approval of the ISS Facility Services Grounds Division Enterprise Agreement 2015. The dispute arose between the applicant, which is an employer within the grounds division of the facility services industry, and its employees who are represented by the respondent, the National Union of Workers. The key issue before the Commission was whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly whether it provided for the proper operation of the enterprise and the protection of the employees’ interests.

The Commission examined various aspects of the agreement, including the definition of bargaining units, the classification of employees, the provisions for wages and conditions, and the mechanisms for dispute resolution. The applicant argued that the agreement was necessary to ensure the efficient operation of the business and to provide a fair and flexible framework for the management of its workforce. The respondent, on the other hand, contended that the agreement failed to adequately protect the employees' rights and interests, particularly in relation to the classification of casual employees and the calculation of penalty rates.

After carefully considering the arguments and evidence presented by both parties, the Commission found that the agreement did not meet the requirements for approval. The Commission was concerned that the agreement did not provide for the proper classification of employees, particularly casual employees, which could result in unfair treatment and exploitation. Additionally, the Commission found that the agreement did not adequately protect the employees' rights to fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. As a result, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed.

The Commission's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide for the proper classification of employees and protect their rights and interests. Employers must ensure that their agreements comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and provide for the proper operation of the enterprise while also protecting the interests of their employees. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of the application for approval and potential legal and reputational consequences for the employer.

ISS Facility Services Pty Ltd T/A ISS Facility Services

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established