[2013] FWCA 9280 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Kidbiz Pty Ltd atf Bennett Family Trust T/A Bagdad Childcare Centre
(AG2013/8839)
BAGDAD CHILDCARE CENTRE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013
Tasmania | |
COMMISSIONER LEE | MELBOURNE, 25 NOVEMBER 2013 |
Application for approval of the Bagdad Childcare Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013.
[1] An application has been made for approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Bagdad Childcare Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made by Kidbiz Pty Ltd atf Bennett Family Trust T/A Bagdad Childcare Centre (the Applicant) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
[2] The Applicant has provided a written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings given is attached to this decision at 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] The undertakings now form part of the Agreement and a copy will be kept on the file. A copy of the undertakings should be circulated to all employees and attached to all copies of the Agreement subsequently produced or used by the parties.
[4] Subject to the undertaking referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 2 December 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.
COMMISSIONER
Annexure A:
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code J, AE405551 PR544992>
- AGLC
- Kidbiz Pty Ltd atf Bennett Family Trust T/A Bagdad Childcare Centre [2013] FWCA 9280
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 9280
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining if the agreement appropriately met the criteria set out under the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved scrutinising the agreement to ensure it covered all necessary minimum terms and conditions, as well as confirming that the proper processes for seeking approval were followed, including the requisite consultation with relevant employee representatives. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the agreement adhered to the formal requirements for documentation and submission to the Fair Work Commission.
Upon reviewing the agreement, the court found that the agreement did not explicitly include all the mandated minimum terms and conditions, and it was not supported by a certificate from a certified agreement. The court concluded that the agreement was not compliant with the statutory requirements and, therefore, could not be approved. The decision was grounded in the necessity for compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009 and the absence of a proper consultation process with the relevant employee representatives. As a result, the application for approval was dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.