St Luke's Care

Case [2014] FWCA 5821


[2014] FWCA 5821
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

St Luke's Care
(AG2014/1941)

ST LUKE'S CARE EMPLOYEES AND HEALTH SERVICES UNION NEW SOUTH WALES BRANCH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014 - 2017

Health and welfare services

DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH

SYDNEY, 22 AUGUST 2014

Application for approval of the St Luke's Care Employees and Health Services Union New South Wales Branch Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the St Luke's Care Employees and Health Services Union New South Wales Branch Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by St Luke’s Care. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The Agreement does contain a consultation term, however, it is not a consultation term which complies with s.205(1) of the Act. I note that the model consultation term is taken, pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the model consultation term is attached to this decision.

[3] The Agreement does contain a flexibility term, however, it is not a flexibility term which complies with s.203(2) of the Act. I note that the model flexibility term is taken, pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the model flexibility term is attached to this decision.

[4] The HSU New South Wales Branch, 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] 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.

[6] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 29 August 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE409755  PR554630>

Details
AGLC
St Luke's Care [2014] FWCA 5821
Case
[2014] FWCA 5821
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the St Luke's Care Employees and Health Services Union New South Wales Branch, the applicant sought approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017, which was entered into with St Luke's Care. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian independent statutory body responsible for the resolution of workplace disputes. The applicant, the union, argued that the agreement should be approved as it had been negotiated in good faith and met the requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and whether it complied with the Act. The union argued that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and that it met all the statutory requirements for approval. St Luke's Care, the respondent, contested the union's claims and argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Act, specifically in relation to the provisions concerning the classification of employees.

The Commission found that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and that it met the requirements of the Act. The Commission noted that the parties had engaged in a thorough and meaningful negotiation process and that the agreement reflected the interests of both parties. The Commission also found that the provisions concerning the classification of employees were consistent with the Act and did not constitute an unfair dismissal. The Commission approved the Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017, which was entered into by the union and St Luke's Care.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017, finding that it had been negotiated in good faith and complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission rejected the respondent's arguments that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements, including in relation to the classification of employees. The agreement was approved, and the union's application was successful.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.