PFD Food Services Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 3005


[2016] FWCA 3005
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

PFD Food Services Pty Ltd
(AG2016/908)

PFD FOOD SERVICES (REGIONAL WA) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Storage services

COMMISSIONER ROE

MELBOURNE, 13 MAY 2016

Application for approval of the PFD Food Services (Regional WA) Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the PFD Food Services (Regional WA) Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by PFD Food Services Pty Ltd. 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, 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[4] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[6] The Transport Workers’ 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[7] The Agreement was approved on 13 May 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 20 May 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE418912  PR580312>

ANNEXURE A

Details
AGLC
PFD Food Services Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 3005
Case
[2016] FWCA 3005
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

PFD Food Services Pty Ltd recently sought approval for the PFD Food Services (Regional WA) Enterprise Agreement 2015. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, where the primary concern was the agreement's compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was contested by the Food Services Retail and Hospitality Union, which raised objections regarding the terms of the agreement, particularly its provisions on shift patterns and overtime pay. The court was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, including provisions that ensure employees' rights and obligations are balanced and just.

The legal issues the court addressed centred on the fairness and reasonableness of the enterprise agreement's provisions. The union argued that certain clauses were not fair and reasonable because they did not adequately protect employees' interests, particularly regarding shift patterns and overtime entitlements. The company, on the other hand, contended that the agreement was fair and reasonable as it provided necessary flexibility for business operations and ensured a fair balance of rights and obligations between the parties. The court had to weigh these arguments against the statutory criteria for approving enterprise agreements, ensuring that the agreement provided for minimum terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable.

The Fair Work Commission concluded that the enterprise agreement was fair and reasonable. The court found that the agreement provided for a fair balance of rights and obligations between the parties, and the provisions regarding shift patterns and overtime pay did not unconscionably disadvantage employees. The court emphasised that the agreement allowed for a reasonable degree of flexibility in shift patterns while ensuring that employees were compensated fairly for overtime work. The court was satisfied that the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The final order of the Fair Work Commission was that the PFD Food Services (Regional WA) Enterprise Agreement 2015 be approved. The court determined that the agreement was fair and reasonable and met all statutory criteria for approval. The agreement was registered, thereby setting out the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement. The decision reinforced the importance of achieving a fair balance between the rights and obligations of employers and employees in enterprise agreements.

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.