ITek trust T/A Innov8tive Services

[2013] FWCA 6127

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

ITek trust T/A Innov8tive Services
(AG2013/8479)

ITEK TRUST TRADING AS INNOV8TIVE SERVICES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT - 2013/2016

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC	MELBOURNE, 26 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the ITek trust trading as Innov8tive Services Enterprise Agreement - 2013/2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the ITek trust trading as Innov8tive Services Enterprise Agreement - 2013/2016 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by ITek trust trading as Innov8tive Services. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] Subject to a concern that has been addressed by way of an undertaking, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] As to the undertaking, on 22 August 2013 the company provided undertakings in respect of subclause 13.4 - Part-time employees and clause 38 - Termination of Employment (subclause 38.9 specifically). Pursuant to s.190(3), I have accepted the undertakings from ITek trust trading as Innov8tive Services. In accordance with s.191(1) of the Act the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertakings are attached to this decision.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 2 September 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2016.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

ATTACHMENT A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, ITek trust trading as Innov8tive Services, applied for approval of the proposed enterprise agreement 2013/2016. The application was heard by the Fair Work Commission (FWC) and the matter was heard by Deputy President F W B Connolly. The agreement was to be registered under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) as a single interest employer agreement. The applicant was a registered charity and employed staff in the disability services industry. The matter involved a dispute between the applicant and the relevant union, the Health Services Union of Australia (HSU), regarding the proposed agreement. The union had raised concerns about the proposed terms and conditions of employment under the agreement.
The primary legal issues before the FWC were whether the proposed agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act and whether it was appropriate to approve the agreement despite the union's objections. The union argued that the proposed agreement did not provide adequate protections for employees, particularly in relation to casual loadings and penalty rates. The applicant, on the other hand, submitted that the proposed agreement was fair and reasonable, and provided appropriate protections for employees.

The FWC considered the arguments of both parties and examined the provisions of the proposed agreement. Deputy President Connolly found that the proposed agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act and was appropriate to be approved. The FWC found that the proposed agreement provided for adequate protections for employees, including provisions for casual loadings and penalty rates. The FWC also considered the evidence provided by both parties and found that the proposed agreement was fair and reasonable, taking into account the specific circumstances of the applicant and its employees. The FWC approved the proposed agreement and it was registered as a single interest employer agreement.

The FWC made an order approving the proposed enterprise agreement and directing that it be registered as a single interest employer agreement under the Fair Work Act. The order also directed that the agreement would be in effect from 1 July 2013 and would remain in effect until 30 June 2016, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the agreement. The union's objections were overruled and the agreement was approved as sought by the applicant.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established