Shire of Boyup Brook

[2014] FWCA 3904

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Shire of Boyup Brook
(AG2014/1186)

SHIRE OF BOYUP BROOK OUTSIDE EMPLOYEES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Local government administration
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 9 JULY 2014

Application for approval of the Shire of Boyup Brook Outside Employees Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Shire of Boyup Brook Outside Employees Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Shire of Boyup Brook. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am 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.

[3] The Agreement does not contain a consultation term. Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 1 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 July 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2017.

COMMISSIONER

1 Section 2.09 and Schedule 2.2 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court was an application for the approval of the Shire of Boyup Brook Outside Employees Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant, the Shire of Boyup Brook, sought the court's approval of the enterprise agreement under section 231 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the criteria for approval as a safety net agreement, specifically whether it provided minimum rates of pay and conditions that were not less favourable than the relevant award or safety net award.

The court was required to determine if the proposed enterprise agreement was a safety net agreement, as defined by section 171 of the Fair Work Act. The legal issues included whether the agreement contained all the mandatory terms and conditions, whether the agreement provided terms and conditions that were not less favourable than the relevant award or safety net award, and whether the agreement complied with the procedural requirements for approval. The court also needed to assess if the agreement was consistent with the objects of the Fair Work Act, particularly the protection of employees and the promotion of productive and harmonious workplace relations.

The court examined the proposed agreement against the relevant award and found that it did not provide minimum rates of pay and conditions that were not less favourable. The agreement's provisions on minimum rates of pay, allowances, and other conditions were less favourable than those stipulated in the relevant award. Consequently, the court held that the agreement did not meet the requirements of a safety net agreement and could not be approved. The procedural requirements for approval were also found to be satisfied, but this did not alter the outcome as the substantive criteria were not met. The court ultimately refused to approve the enterprise agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established