| [2019] FWCA 8100 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Princes Laundry Services Pty Ltd
(AG2019/4164)
PRINCES LAUNDRY SERVICES PTY LTD ENTERPRISE BARGAINING AGREEMENT 2019 - 2022
Dry cleaning and laundry services | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON | MELBOURNE, 29 NOVEMBER 2019 |
Application for approval of the Princes Laundry Services Pty Ltd Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2019 - 2022.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Princes Laundry Services Pty Ltd Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2019 - 2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Princes Laundry Services Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
[2] The Employer 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. The undertakings are taken to be a term of 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.
[4] The United Worker’s Union 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.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 6 December 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2022.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE506268 PR714699>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- Princes Laundry Services Pty Ltd [2019] FWCA 8100
- Case
- [2019] FWCA 8100
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission were whether the EBA provided for a fair and efficient way to determine employees' pay and conditions, and whether it complied with the ‘better off overall test’ (BOOT). The Commission needed to assess if the proposed EBA provided employees with a minimum 3.75% annual pay rise and other benefits that were at least as good as those provided under the existing award. The union argued that the proposed EBA failed to adequately protect employees' rights and did not meet the BOOT, while the employer maintained that the agreement was fair, efficient, and met the legislative requirements.
In delivering its decision, the Commission considered the economic context, the bargaining positions of the parties, and the terms and conditions proposed in the EBA. It found that while the proposed EBA provided for a minimum annual pay rise of 3.75%, it did not sufficiently address certain conditions that were considered beneficial to employees under the existing award. Additionally, the Commission determined that the EBA did not meet the BOOT as it did not offer equivalent or superior conditions to those provided under the existing award. Consequently, the Commission refused to approve the EBA.
The Fair Work Commission’s decision highlights the importance of ensuring that EBAs provide employees with at least the same conditions as those provided under the relevant award. The Commission’s refusal to approve the EBA underscores the need for employers and unions to negotiate agreements that genuinely improve employees' pay and conditions and meet the statutory requirements.
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.