| [2025] FWCA 2376 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Melbourne Anglican Diocesan Schools Commission Limited Trading AS Hume Anglican Grammar School
(AG2025/2109)
HUME ANGLICAN GRAMMAR AGREEMENT 2025
| Educational services | |
| COMMISSIONER TRAN | MELBOURNE, 18 JULY 2025 |
Application for approval of the Hume Anglican Grammar Agreement 2025
Melbourne Anglican Diocesan Schools Commission Limited (ABN: 72 116 666 883) has applied for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Hume Anglican Grammar Agreement 2025 under s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009.
The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
I observe that Clause 54.5(d) – Withholding monies at termination is likely to be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards. Clause 54.5(d) provides for potential deductions from wages that may not be a permitted deduction in accordance with s 324, and may be of no effect to the extent that it offends s 326 of the Act.
Clause 7.3 of the Agreement gives precedence to the NES, and I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.
I am satisfied that each requirement of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
The Independent Education Union of Australia (IEU) lodged a Form F18 statutory declaration giving notice under s 183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s 201(2) of the Act, I note the Agreement covers the IEU.
The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s 54 of the Act, will operate from 25 July 2025.
In accordance with clause 2.2, the nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 January 2028.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE529742 PR789781>
- AGLC
- Melbourne Anglican Diocesan Schools Commission Limited Trading AS Hume Anglican Grammar School [2025] FWCA 2376
- Case
- [2025] FWCA 2376
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided adequate procedural safeguards, if the terms were fair and reasonable, and whether the agreement balanced the interests of both the employer and the employees. Furthermore, the Commission needed to determine whether the agreement was consistent with the overarching objectives of the Fair Work Act, which include promoting higher wages and better conditions. The Commission's role was to ensure that the agreement was not only procedurally sound but also substantively fair, considering the interests of all parties involved.
The Commission found that the Hume Anglican Grammar Agreement 2025 was procedurally fair as it adhered to the requirements of the Fair Work Act. It was concluded that the agreement provided the necessary safeguards and allowed for a proper consultation process between the school and the teachers. In terms of fairness and reasonableness, the Commission determined that the agreement's terms were not unduly harsh, and they balanced the interests of both the employer and the employees. The Commission considered the agreement to be consistent with the objectives of the Fair Work Act, promoting higher wages and better conditions while maintaining a fair balance of interests. Accordingly, the Commission approved the agreement, recognising its compliance with the necessary legal standards.
The Fair Work Commission approved the Hume Anglican Grammar Agreement 2025, finding it to be procedurally fair and substantively balanced. The decision confirmed that the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act, including promoting fair terms and conditions of employment. The Commission's approval of the agreement ensures that it will govern the employment conditions for teachers at Hume Anglican Grammar School, subject to the legal standards set forth in the Fair Work Act.
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.