Mildura Rural City Council

[2013] FWCA 3226

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Mildura Rural City Council
(AG2013/6042)

MILDURA RURAL CITY COUNCIL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT NUMBER 7, 2012

Local government administration
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SMITH	MELBOURNE, 22 MAY 2013

Mildura Rural City Council Enterprise Agreement Number 7, 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Mildura Rural City Council Enterprise Agreement Number 7, 2012 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by theMildura Rural City Council. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Australian Nursing Federation, Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union and The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 29 May 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 24 February 2016.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Mildura Rural City Council is the applicant and the Australian Building and Construction Commission, the respondent. The dispute involves the interpretation of an enterprise agreement made under the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the enterprise agreement in question contained valid and lawful terms.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether certain provisions within the Mildura Rural City Council Enterprise Agreement Number 7, 2012, were inconsistent with the Fair Work Act. The agreement contained terms that the Commission needed to assess for compliance with the Act, particularly in relation to penalty rates and the classification of employees. The Commission had to consider if the terms were in line with the legislative framework and if they could be enforced.

In its reasoning, the Commission found that several provisions in the enterprise agreement were indeed inconsistent with the Fair Work Act. These inconsistencies related primarily to the classification of employees and the application of penalty rates. The Commission ruled that these provisions were not lawful and therefore could not be enforced. Consequently, the Commission varied the agreement to remove these invalid terms, ensuring compliance with the Act.

As a result of the Commission's findings and variations, the enterprise agreement was amended to remove the inconsistent provisions. The Fair Work Commission's decision effectively clarified the terms of the agreement, ensuring they adhered to the legislative requirements set out in the Fair Work Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established