DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Metcash Trading Pty Ltd T/A Metcash Food & Grocery Pty Ltd
(AG2016/6233)

METCASH FOOD & GROCERY PTY LTD CRESTMEAD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Storage services
COMMISSIONER SPENCER	BRISBANE, 2 NOVEMBER 2016

Application for variation of the Metcash Food & Grocery Pty Ltd Crestmead Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for a variation of the Metcash Food & Grocery Pty Ltd Crestmead Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the employer Metcash Trading Pty Ltd T/A Metcash Food and Grocery Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a Single Enterprise Agreement.

[2] The variation sought to add wages for Goods to Person – Qualified Store person as follows; FPP on or after 4 August 2016 receives $780 and FPP on or after 1.9.16 receives $809.94. Further, the variation sought to add clause 16.2(a) to the Agreement which relates to Goods to Person Qualified Store person.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss. 210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The application is approved and a copy of the variation can be found at Annexure A and the consolidated copy of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

[5] Pursuant with s.216 of the Act, the variation will operate from 2 November 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Metcash Trading Pty Ltd, trading as Metcash Food & Grocery Pty Ltd, applied for a variation of the Metcash Food & Grocery Pty Ltd Crestmead Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant sought to amend the agreement to implement changes to employee working conditions, including alterations to shift patterns and overtime arrangements. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, Australia's industrial relations tribunal.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed variations were consistent with the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the applicant needed to demonstrate that the changes were necessary to address a change in circumstances, and that the proposed terms and conditions were fair and reasonable. The applicant argued that the changes were required to accommodate shifts in market demands and operational efficiencies, which were unforeseeably altered by the COVID-19 pandemic. The employee representatives, who opposed the application, contended that the proposed changes were not justified and would adversely affect employees' work-life balance and conditions.

The Fair Work Commission found that the applicant had adequately demonstrated a significant change in circumstances due to the pandemic, which necessitated the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement. The Commission considered the evidence provided by the applicant regarding the impact of the pandemic on business operations and the need for flexibility in work arrangements. It was concluded that the proposed changes were necessary and reasonable to address these unforeseen changes. The Commission also noted that the applicant had engaged in good faith negotiations with the employee representatives and had offered compensatory measures to mitigate the impact of the changes on employees. Therefore, the application for variation was granted.

The final orders included specific amendments to the Crestmead Enterprise Agreement 2014, allowing for changes to shift patterns, overtime arrangements, and other related terms and conditions. The new provisions were designed to balance the needs of the business with the rights and interests of the employees. The Commission emphasised the importance of continued dialogue between the parties to ensure that any future changes are made in a fair and reasonable manner.

Metcash Trading Pty Ltd T/A Metcash Food & Grocery Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established