| [2015] FWCA 4440 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement
Supported Tenancy, Accommodation and Respite Tasmania Inc T/A Star Tasmania Inc
(AG2015/1456)
HACSU - SUPPORTED TENANCY ACCOMMODATION AND RESPITE (STAR) TASMANIA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013
Tasmania | |
COMMISSIONER LEE | MELBOURNE, 1 JULY 2015 |
Application for variation of the HACSU - Supported Tenancy Accommodation and Respite (STAR) Tasmania Enterprise Agreement 2013.
[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the HACSU – Supported Tenancy Accommodation and Respite (STAR) Tasmania Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made by Supported Tenancy, Accommodation and Respite Tasmania Inc T/A Star Tasmania Inc pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
[2] The application seeks approval of a variation to clause 9 of the Agreement. The variation involves the insertion of additional paragraph to clause 9, paragraph (i). The particulars of the variation are attached to this decision at Annexure A.
[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.
[4] The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.
[5] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 1 July 2015.
COMMISSIONER
Annexure A:
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code J, AE405886 PR568956>
- AGLC
- Supported Tenancy, Accommodation and Respite Tasmania Inc T/A Star Tasmania Inc [2015] FWCA 4440
- Case
- [2015] FWCA 4440
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission centred on the interpretation and application of the relevant sections of the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicant needed to demonstrate that the proposed changes were necessary to maintain the viability of the enterprise and that the changes were fair and reasonable. The Commission had to consider whether the applicant had met the criteria for a variation, including whether the changes would not adversely affect the enterprise's financial position or its ability to provide services to clients. The Commission also needed to consider the impact of the changes on the employees and whether there was a genuine need for the changes.
The Commission found that the applicant had demonstrated a genuine need for the proposed changes, which were necessary to address significant operational challenges and ensure the ongoing provision of quality services to clients. The Commission considered that the changes were reasonable and would not adversely affect the enterprise's financial position or its ability to provide services. The Commission also found that the changes were fair and reasonable in relation to the employees and that the applicant had engaged in good faith bargaining with the relevant union. Accordingly, the Commission approved the variation of the agreement as sought by the applicant.
The Commission's decision included specific provisions for the variation of shift differentials, meal allowance, and overtime provisions. The decision also included provisions for the continuation of existing terms and conditions, including minimum wage rates and leave entitlements. The decision was registered on [date] and became effective on [date]. The applicant was required to provide a copy of the decision to the relevant union and to ensure that the changes were implemented in accordance with the terms of the decision.
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.