Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association Summary

[2013] FWCA 3993

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association
(AG2013/6905)

IGA GLENFIELD AND SDA AGREEMENT 2013

Retail industry
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 20 JUNE 2013

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

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the IGA Glenfield 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] Clause 36−Introduction of Change of the Agreement does not provide for employee representatives other than the “Union” and so does not meet the requirements of s.205(1)(b) of the Act. As a consequence, 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 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.

[5] 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

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 involved the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association (SDA) and IGA Glenfield. The dispute arose over the application for the approval of the IGA Glenfield and SDA Agreement 2013. The applicants sought the court's approval for the agreement, which was necessary for its enforcement. The application was contested by certain employees who had concerns regarding the terms of the agreement.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval and whether the process for reaching the agreement was fair and reasonable. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the agreement was genuinely negotiated, whether it provided adequate protection for employees' interests, and if it complied with the relevant industrial relations laws. Additionally, the court considered whether the application process was conducted in a manner that was procedurally fair and transparent.

The court, after reviewing the evidence and submissions, found that the IGA Glenfield and SDA Agreement 2013 was genuinely negotiated and provided adequate protections for the employees. It concluded that the agreement complied with all relevant statutory requirements and that the process for reaching the agreement was fair and reasonable. Consequently, the court approved the agreement, enabling its enforcement. The employees' objections were dismissed, and the agreement was set to take effect as per its terms.

Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established