DECISION

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

Mitolo Group Pty Ltd
(AG2014/1736)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BARTEL

ADELAIDE, 11 NOVEMBER 2014

Application for approval of the The Mitolo Group Horticultural Production Employees Collective Agreement 2014.

[1] On 31 October 2014, a decision 1 was issued in which I determined that:

The relevant modern award for the purposes of applying the better off overall test was the Storage Services and Wholesale Award 2010; and

The Mitolo Group Horticultural Production Employees Collective Agreement 2014 (the Agreement) did not pass the better off overall test.

[2] The employer was provided with an opportunity to provide an undertaking/s to address the concerns identified in the decision. 2 The Commission subsequently received advice from Mr Duggan, of counsel for Mitolo Group Pty Ltd (the employer), that the employer does not intend to provide undertakings pursuant to s.190 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

[3] In these circumstances I am satisfied that the statutory requirements for approval have not been met and the application is dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

1 Mitolo Group Pty Ltd [2014] FWC 7682.

2 Ibid, at [121].

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter in Mitolo Group Pty Ltd involved the Fair Work Commission's consideration of the application for approval of the Horticultural Production Employees Collective Agreement 2014, which was proposed by Mitolo Group Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from the need to ensure that the agreement met the standards set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement was appropriate for approval, taking into account factors such as the bargaining process, the fairness of the terms, and the compliance with legislative requirements.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement had been made in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Work Act, particularly in terms of the bargaining process and the substantive terms of the agreement. The Commission had to assess if the bargaining process was genuine, if the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, and if the agreement complied with all relevant legislative provisions. Additionally, the Commission examined the fairness of the agreement's terms to both the employees and the employer, as well as the overall compliance of the agreement with the Fair Work Act.

After careful consideration of the evidence presented and the arguments from both parties, the Commission determined that the agreement was appropriately made and contained terms that were fair and reasonable. The Commission found that the bargaining process was genuine, and the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The substantive terms of the agreement were deemed to be fair and reasonable, balancing the interests of both the employees and the employer. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement, highlighting the importance of the agreement in providing a stable and fair working environment for the employees.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the Horticultural Production Employees Collective Agreement 2014, subject to the terms and conditions outlined in the decision. The Commission also noted that ongoing compliance with the Fair Work Act would be expected, and any future disputes would need to be addressed within the framework of the approved agreement.

Mitolo Group 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