DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Spotless Facility Services Proprietary Limited T/A Spotless
(AG2015/4886)

SPOTLESS SOUTHBANK EDUCATION PRECINCT (CAMPUS SUPPORT) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Cleaning services
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 15 SEPTEMBER 2015

Application for approval of the Spotless Southbank Education Precinct (Campus Support) Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Spotless Southbank Education Precinct (Campus Support) Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Spotless Facility Services Proprietary Limited T/A Spotless. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

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

[4] United Voice, 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), 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 22 September 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case were Spotless Facility Services Proprietary Limited, trading as Spotless, and the Australian Education Union. The dispute was regarding the approval of the Spotless Southbank Education Precinct (Campus Support) Enterprise Agreement 2015. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission of Australia. The Australian Education Union sought approval of the agreement, while Spotless contested the application on several grounds, including the process by which the agreement was negotiated and the fairness of certain provisions.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated, if the bargaining process was free from any improper influence or coercion, and whether the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable. The Commission had to determine whether the agreement met the statutory criteria set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. Spotless argued that the agreement was not genuinely negotiated, as it was imposed on the employees and not the result of proper collective bargaining. They also claimed that certain provisions of the agreement were unfair and unreasonable.

The Commission found that the agreement was genuinely negotiated, as there was evidence of genuine attempts to negotiate and that the agreement was not imposed on the employees. The Commission determined that the bargaining process was free from any improper influence or coercion, and the agreement met the statutory criteria set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission also found that the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, taking into account the nature of the work and the interests of the employees. The application for approval of the agreement was subsequently approved by the Commission.

As a result of the decision, the Spotless Southbank Education Precinct (Campus Support) Enterprise Agreement 2015 was approved and registered with the Fair Work Commission. This decision sets a precedent for similar cases and ensures that the rights of employees and employers are protected within the framework of Australian industrial relations law.

Spotless Facility Services Proprietary Limited T/A Spotless

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established