Samarinda Aged Services

[2014] FWCA 832

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Samarinda Aged Services
(AG2013/12855)

SAMARINDA AGED SERVICES HEALTH AND ALLIED SERVICES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Aged care industry
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 7 FEBRUARY 2014

Application for approval of the Samarinda Aged Services Health and Allied Services Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] On 23 December 2013 Samarinda Aged Services (Applicant) made an application for approval of the Samarinda Aged Services Health and Allied Services Enterprise Agreement 2013 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement was lodged within 14 days after it was made.

[3] The Commission is satisfied that each of the requirements of ss 186, 187 and 188 of the Act, as are relevant to this application for approval, have been met.

[4] The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, 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), the Commission notes that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[5] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s 54 of the Act the Agreement will operate from 14 February 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 January 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Samarinda Aged Services lodged an application for the approval of the Samarinda Aged Services Health and Allied Services Enterprise Agreement 2013, which was opposed by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation. The application was heard by the Fair Work Commission. The central issue was whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement in question involved the establishment of a new classification system for employees and the implementation of a new pay scale. The opposition centred around the perceived inadequacy of the proposed classification system and the new pay scale, which the union argued did not adequately reflect the skills and responsibilities of the employees.

The Commission considered the need for the agreement to provide for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. The Commission noted that the proposed classification system was designed to more accurately reflect the roles and responsibilities of the employees, and that the new pay scale was intended to be competitive within the industry. However, the Commission also highlighted the importance of ensuring that the agreement did not unfairly disadvantage any group of employees. After reviewing the evidence and submissions from both parties, the Commission concluded that the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval. The new classification system and pay scale were found to be reasonable and in line with industry standards, and the agreement was approved.

The Commission found that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and that the new classification system and pay scale were not detrimental to the employees. The Commission also noted that the agreement provided for a fair process for resolving disputes and for making changes to the agreement in the future. The approval of the agreement was therefore upheld, and the application was successful. The Commission ordered that the agreement be approved and registered under the Fair Work Act 2009.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established