Liquorland (QLD) Pty Ltd; LHG Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 4739

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Liquorland (QLD) Pty Ltd; LHG Pty Ltd
(AG2014/1621)

HOTELS AGREEMENT 2014

Hospitality industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS	SYDNEY, 17 JULY 2014

Application for approval of the Hotels Agreement 2014.

[1] This is an application, pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’), filed by Liquorland (QLD) Pty Ltd and LHG Pty Ltd (the ‘applicants’) which seek the approval of the Fair Work Commission (the ‘Commission’) of a single enterprise agreement to be known as the Hotels Agreement 2014 (the ‘Agreement’). The Agreement was negotiated with United Voice (the ‘Union’) and is to cover 1888 employees who are engaged in the applicants’ hotel, tavern or similar operations, except for Venue Managers and other management staff, throughout Australia, except for South Australia. It does not cover employees working at the applicant’s retail operations, who are covered by a separate enterprise agreement. For the purposes of s 186(3) of the Act, I am satisfied that the group of employees to be covered by this Agreement has been fairly chosen.

[2] The employees were last notified of their representational rights on 27 March 2014, and voting for the Agreement’s approval took place between 14 and 24 June 2014. The time limits under s 181(2) of the Act are thereby satisfied. In an electronic ballot, 375 of the 390 employees who cast a valid vote, agreed to approve the Agreement. The application for approval of the Agreement was lodged on 30 June 2014, thereby satisfying s 185(3) of the Act.

[3] In the Employer’s Declaration in support of the application (Form F17) Mrs M Klietz, Senior Employee Relations Advisor, identified the following instruments as the relevant reference instruments for the purposes of the Better Off Overall Test (the ‘BOOT’):

● Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010 [MA000009];
● Hospitality Industry - Accommodation, Hotels, Resorts and Gaming Award 1998 [AP783479];
● Hotel & Tavern Workers’ Award, 1978 [AN160174]; and
● Hotels, Resorts and Certain Other Licensed Premises Award - State (Excluding South-East Queensland) 2003 [AN140148].

[4] Mrs Klietz said that the Agreement did contain some terms and conditions which were less beneficial than those under the reference instruments, including reduced penalty rates for work performed at certain times in the evenings and on Sundays. However, the Agreement provides for a number of terms and conditions which are more beneficial than those under the reference instruments, including higher general rates of pay, more generous junior rates of pay, the provision of a number of allowances, more generous community service leave, jury service leave and severance entitlements in circumstances of redundancy. I am satisfied that the Agreement passes the BOOT. The Agreement provides for the mandatory flexibility and consultation terms at clauses 10 and 11.4-11.5 respectively, and a disputes resolution procedure at clause 11.2 and Appendix C provides for conciliation and arbitration by the Commission.

[5] At a hearing of the application on 15 July 2014, Mrs M Klietz appeared with Mr M Del Bello for the applicants and Mr N Swancott for the Union. The Union had filed a Declaration in relation to the application (Form 18) supporting the approval of the Agreement and giving notice that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement (s 183). For the purposes of s 201(2) of the Act, I note that the Union is to be covered by the Agreement. Mrs Klietz outlined the main features of the Agreement and submitted that all of the legislative requirements for approval of the Agreement have been satisfied and the Agreement should be approved by the Commission. Mrs Klietz confirmed that the rates of pay are to be increased by 3% on 1 July 2014, 1 July 2015 and 1 July 2016. Mr Swancott raised a concern that the Union’s analysis suggested that casual employees who worked only on Sundays could be paid less than under the reference instruments. Mrs Klietz confirmed that this could technically be the case. However, the applicant rostered its casual employees across a number of shifts and the possibility of this occurring would be remote. I accept this explanation.

[6] Having heard the parties’ submissions and upon reviewing the terms of the preapproval process documentation and the Agreement itself, I am satisfied that all of the requirements of the Act, in particular ss 180, 186, 187 and 188, in so far as relevant to this application, have been met. Accordingly, I approve a single enterprise agreement known as the Hotels Agreement 2014.Pursuant to s 54 of the Act, the Agreement shall operate from 22 July 2014 and have a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Liquorland (QLD) Pty Ltd, along with LHG Pty Ltd, applied for the approval of the Hotels Agreement 2014, which concerns the terms and conditions of employment for certain employees within the liquor retail industry in Queensland. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction to approve such agreements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute arose as the parties sought to standardise employment terms for a range of workers employed in the hotels sector, and aimed to provide clarity and fairness in employment conditions.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the proposed agreement met the procedural and substantive requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act. Procedurally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act, including whether it was made without the influence of any improper conduct. Substantively, the Commission had to determine if the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, taking into account the needs of both employees and employers. This involved assessing the balance of rights and obligations, and ensuring the agreement did not undermine the existing protections afforded to employees under the National Employment Standards.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, determined that the Hotels Agreement 2014 was procedurally valid and substantively fair. The Commission found that the agreement was made without any improper influence and that it provided a fair and reasonable balance of rights and obligations. The Commission considered the specific terms of the agreement, including those relating to hours of work, penalty rates, and leave entitlements, and concluded that they were not detrimental to the employees. The Commission approved the agreement, recognising its potential to provide certainty and stability in the employment conditions of those within the sector.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the Hotels Agreement 2014, effective from a specified date. The agreement now provides the basis for the terms and conditions of employment for the relevant employees, and the Commission's decision sets a precedent for similar agreements in the liquor retail industry. The approval of the agreement reflects the Commission's commitment to facilitating fair and balanced industrial relations within the sector, while also recognising the need for flexibility in the operation of businesses.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established