DECISION

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

Regional Publishers Pty Ltd T/A Maitland Mercury
(AG2015/1832)

MAITLAND MERCURY CLERICAL ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICES COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015

Clerical industry
COMMISSIONER CARGILL	SYDNEY, 17 FEBRUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Maitland Mercury Clerical, Administrative and Support Services Collective Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement to be known as the Maitland Mercury Clerical, Administrative and Support Services Collective Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Regional Publishers Pty Ltd trading as Maitland Mercury(the company). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The company has provided undertakings in relation to the averaging of hours and the accrual of Annual Leave provisions of the Agreement.

[3] In accepting the undertakings I have accepted they are not likely to either cause financial detriment to an employee or result in substantial changes to the Agreement (s.190(3)). I note that under s.191 of the Act the undertakings are taken to be terms of the Agreement. A copy of the undertakings is attached to the Agreement.

[4] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 24 February 2015. The nominal expiry date is 30 September 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Regional Publishers Pty Ltd, trading as the Maitland Mercury, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Maitland Mercury Clerical, Administrative and Support Services Collective Agreement 2015. The dispute centred around the procedural fairness of the Commission's consideration of the application, specifically whether the Commission adequately considered submissions made by the Applicant and whether the Commission's decision-making process complied with the principles of natural justice.

The court was tasked with determining whether the Commission's decision-making process was procedurally fair, including whether the Commission gave proper consideration to the submissions made by the Applicant. Additionally, the court had to examine whether the Commission's decision-making process adhered to the principles of natural justice, such as the right to be heard and the requirement of impartiality.

The court held that the Commission's decision-making process was procedurally fair and in accordance with the principles of natural justice. The court found that the Commission had given proper consideration to the submissions made by the Applicant, and that the Commission's decision-making process was not flawed. The court concluded that the Commission's decision to approve the agreement was valid and did not require the application to be remitted back to the Commission. The court dismissed the Applicant's appeal and upheld the Commission's decision.

Regional Publishers Pty Ltd T/A Maitland Mercury

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established