Surf Coast Shire Council

[2013] FWCA 6748

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Surf Coast Shire Council
(AG2013/2709)

SURF COAST SHIRE COUNCIL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT NO. 8 2013 - 2016

Local government administration
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SMITH	MELBOURNE, 9 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Surf Coast Shire Council Enterprise Agreement No.8 2013-2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Surf Coast Shire Council Enterprise Agreement No.8 2013-2016 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by the Surf Coast Shire Council. 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 Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union and the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 September 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 August 2016.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Surf Coast Shire Council sought approval for its Enterprise Agreement No.8, which was to cover the period from 2013 to 2016. The application was made to the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary standards and requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The legal issues that the Commission had to address included whether the agreement provided for minimum wages and conditions, if it allowed for fair bargaining, and whether it adhered to the provisions of the Act.

The Commission examined the provisions of the agreement and considered the submissions made by the council and other interested parties. The council argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while some employees contended that it did not adequately protect their rights and interests. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for minimum wages and conditions, and that it allowed for fair bargaining. However, it also found that some provisions were not in line with the Act, and that the agreement did not adequately address issues such as casual employment and redundancy. The Commission ultimately decided that the agreement did not meet the necessary standards and requirements under the Act, and therefore could not be approved.

In its decision, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. It emphasised the need for agreements to be negotiated in good faith, and to take into account the interests of both employers and employees. The Commission also noted the importance of ensuring that agreements are compliant with the provisions of the Act, and that they provide for minimum wages and conditions. The decision serves as a reminder to employers and employees of the need to carefully consider the terms and conditions of any enterprise agreement, and to ensure that they are fair, reasonable, and compliant with the law.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established