Rossiter’s Pty Limited

[2017] FWCA 1964

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

CORRECTION TO decision

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Rossiter’s Pty Limited

(AG2017/528)

Rossiter’s Pty. Ltd. Agreement 2016

Textile industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 10 APRIL 2017

Application for approval of the Rossiter’s Pty. Ltd. Agreement 2016.

The decision issued by the Fair Work Commission on 10 April 2017 [[2017] FWCA 1964] is corrected by replacing paragraph [5] as follows:

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 14 April 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 6 April 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rossiter’s Pty Limited, the respondent, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of an enterprise agreement. The agreement was contested by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), the applicant. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions set out in the Rossiter’s Pty. Ltd. Agreement 2016, which was to be approved under the Fair Work Act 2009. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission by Commissioner Gregory in Melbourne on 10 April 2017.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under section 185 of the Fair Work Act and if the terms were fair and reasonable. The Commission had to consider the applicant’s objections and evaluate whether the agreement complied with the provisions of the Act, including provisions relating to minimum standards, procedural fairness, and the rights of employees to be free from adverse action. The Commission also needed to determine if the agreement met the criteria for being a "better off overall test" (BOOT) agreement.

In delivering the decision, Commissioner Gregory found that the Rossiter’s Pty. Ltd. Agreement 2016 was fair and reasonable and met the requirements for approval under section 185 of the Fair Work Act. The Commission concluded that the agreement complied with the minimum standards set out in the Act and did not unfairly disadvantage any party. The agreement was found to be a BOOT agreement, ensuring that employees were not worse off overall. Accordingly, the Commission approved the agreement, which will operate from 14 April 2017 with a nominal expiry date of 6 April 2020. The Commission issued a corrected decision, replacing paragraph [5] to reflect the approval and operational details of the agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established