DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Navitas Limited
(AG2017/2292)

EYNESBURY HIGH SCHOOL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017

Educational services
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 27 JULY 2017

Application for approval of the Eynesbury High School Enterprise Agreement 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Eynesbury High School Enterprise Agreement 2017. (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Navitas Limited. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, and on the basis of the material contained in the application and accompanying statutory declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Independent Education Union of Australia being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) and based on the statutory declaration provided by the organisation, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 27 July 2017 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 3 August 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 April 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Navitas Limited applied to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for approval of the Eynesbury High School Enterprise Agreement 2017. The application was opposed by the Australian Education Union. The dispute centred on the classification of the roles within the agreement and the application of certain provisions. The FWC, presided over by Deputy President S. J. H. Rice, was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 and was in the best interests of the employees.

The primary legal issues involved assessing whether the agreement was a "better off overall test" (BOOT) agreement and whether it adhered to the statutory requirements for enterprise agreements. The court had to consider if the roles were correctly classified and if the agreement's provisions were fair and reasonable. The FWC also examined the arguments presented by the Australian Education Union regarding the classification of roles and the fairness of certain provisions in the agreement.

In its decision, the FWC found that the application met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act. The court concluded that the agreement was a BOOT agreement, as it provided benefits to the employees that outweighed any disadvantages. The FWC determined that the roles were correctly classified and that the provisions of the agreement were fair and reasonable. The court rejected the arguments made by the Australian Education Union, finding that the agreement did not unfairly disadvantage any employees.

The FWC approved the Eynesbury High School Enterprise Agreement 2017. The court's decision was based on the evidence presented and the findings that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees. The FWC emphasised the importance of the BOOT principle and the need for enterprise agreements to be fair and reasonable. The decision highlighted the role of the FWC in ensuring that agreements meet the statutory requirements and are beneficial to the employees.

Navitas Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established