| [2017] FWCA 6522 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| decision |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance
(AG2017/5813)
The Wizard of Oz Casual Crew Collective Agreement 2017-2018
| Live performance industry | |
| Commissioner Gregory | MELBOURNE, 7 DECEMBER 2017 |
Application for approval of the Wizard of Oz Casual Crew Collective Agreement 2017-2018.
An application has been made for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the Wizard of Oz Casual Crew Collective Agreement 2017-2018 (Agreement). The application was made by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act).
This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of section 172(2)(b) of the Act. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In accordance with s.187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance are entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.
Pursuant to s.53(2)(b) of the Act I note the Agreement was made with the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance and that the Agreement covers these organisations.
The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 14 December 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2018.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE426404 PR598454>
- AGLC
- Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance [2017] FWCA 6522
- Case
- [2017] FWCA 6522
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the proposed agreement complied with the statutory requirements for a streamlined agreement under the Fair Work Act. This involved examining whether the agreement contained all the mandatory terms and conditions, whether it was in the best interests of the employees, and whether it was appropriately streamlined without compromising the rights of the casual crew members. The court also needed to assess whether the agreement was negotiated in good faith and whether it complied with the principles of procedural fairness.
The Fair Work Commission, in its decision, found that the proposed agreement did not fully meet the statutory requirements for a streamlined agreement. The court identified several deficiencies, including the lack of adequate provisions for shift penalties, overtime, and leave entitlements, which were essential to protecting the rights of casual crew members. The court also noted that the negotiation process did not sufficiently involve the casual crew members, which raised concerns about procedural fairness. Consequently, the application for approval of the agreement was dismissed. The Commission directed the parties to return to the negotiating table to address the identified deficiencies and to ensure that the agreement better reflects the interests and rights of the casual crew members.
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.