Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association

[2013] FWCA 3951

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association
(AG2013/6818)

PADBURY IGA AND SDA AGREEMENT 2013

Retail industry
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 20 JUNE 2013

Application for approval of the Padbury IGA and SDA Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Padbury IGA and SDA Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association. 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 Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, 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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 27 June 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application for the approval of the Padbury IGA and SDA Agreement 2013. The parties to the agreement were the Padbury IGA, represented by the Australian Retailers Association, and the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, representing the employees. The application sought to have the agreement recognised as a safety net agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on whether the agreement adequately provided for the employees' terms and conditions of employment, including pay rates, leave entitlements, and other workplace provisions.

The legal issues that the Commission needed to resolve included whether the agreement complied with the statutory safety net provisions in the Fair Work Act, whether it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and whether it was made in good faith and without coercion. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided adequate protections for employees, including those who might be affected by the closure of the Padbury IGA.

In its decision, the Commission determined that the Padbury IGA and SDA Agreement 2013 met the statutory safety net requirements. The Commission found that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, taking into account the specific circumstances of the Padbury IGA. It also concluded that the agreement was made in good faith and without coercion, and that it provided adequate protections for employees. The Commission noted that the agreement included provisions for the payment of penalty rates, adequate leave entitlements, and other workplace protections, which were considered to be consistent with the safety net provisions. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement as a safety net agreement under the Fair Work Act.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Padbury IGA and SDA Agreement 2013 as a safety net agreement, recognising it as compliant with the statutory safety net provisions. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that agreements provide fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment and adequate protections for employees, while also being made in good faith and without coercion.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established