The Arts Centre Gold Coast

Case [2015] FWCA 3139


[2015] FWCA 3139
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

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

The Arts Centre Gold Coast
(AG2015/2461)

THE ARTS CENTRE GOLD COAST SINGLE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

Hospitality industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAMS

SYDNEY, 6 MAY 2015

Application for approval of The Arts Centre Gold Coast Single Enterprise Agreement.

[1] This is an application, pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the ‘Act’), filed by The Arts Centre Gold Coast (the ‘applicant’) which seeks the approval of the Fair Work Commission (the ‘Commission’) of a single enterprise agreement to be known as The Arts Centre Gold Coast Single Enterprise Agreement (the ‘Agreement’). The Agreement was negotiated with the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (the ‘Union’) and Ms D Witalik, a nominated Employee Bargaining Representative (EBR). The Agreement is to cover 126 employees who are employed at the applicant’s Arts Centre in Surfers Paradise, Queensland.

[2] The employees were last notified of their representational rights on 8 January 2015, and voting for the Agreement’s approval took place on 8 and 9 April 2015. The time limits under s 181(2) of the Act are thereby satisfied. In a secret ballot, 61 of the 62 employees who cast a valid vote, agreed to approve the Agreement. The application for approval of the Agreement was lodged on 22 April 2015, thereby satisfying s 185(3) of the Act.

[3] In the Employer’s Declaration in support of the application (Form F17) Ms D Puia, General Manager, identified the Hospitality Industry (General) Award 2010 [MA000009], the Live Performance Award 2010 [MA000081], the Amusement, Events and Recreation Award 2010 [MA000080] and the Clerks - Private Sector Award 2010 [MA000002] as the relevant reference instruments for the purposes of the Better Off Overall Test (the ‘BOOT’). Ms Puiasaid that the Agreement provides for higher rates of pay and that there are no less beneficial terms or conditions. I am satisfied that the Agreement passes the BOOT. The Agreement provides for the mandatory flexibility and consultation terms at clauses 54 and 55 respectively, and a disputes resolution procedure at clause provides for conciliation and arbitration by the Commission.

[4] At a hearing of the application on 6 May 2015, Mr G Heuston of Employer Advocacy Solutions Pty Ltdappeared with Ms L White for the applicant and Ms D Witalik appeared in her capacity as EBR. Mr Heuston outlined the main features of the Agreement and submitted that all of the legislative requirements for approval of the Agreement have been satisfied and the Agreement should be approved by the Commission. He explained that rates of pay are to be increased by 3% on 1 July in each year of the Agreement’s nominal term. Ms Witalik supported the submissions of Mr Heuston and indicated that she was happy with the Agreement. The Union did not appear, but had filed a Declaration in relation to the application (Form 18) supporting the approval of the Agreement and giving notice that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement (s 183). For the purposes of s 201(2) of the Act, I note that the Union is to be covered by the Agreement.

[5] Having heard the parties’ submissions and upon reviewing the terms of the preapproval process documentation and the Agreement itself, I am satisfied that all of the requirements of the Act, in particular ss 180, 186, 187 and 188, in so far as relevant to this application, have been met. Accordingly, I approve a single enterprise agreement known as The Arts Centre Gold Coast Single Enterprise Agreement. Pursuant to s 54 of the Act, the Agreement shall operate from 13 May 2015 and have a nominal expiry date of 12 May 2019.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE413821  PR567106>

Details
AGLC
The Arts Centre Gold Coast [2015] FWCA 3139
Case
[2015] FWCA 3139
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Arts Centre Gold Coast applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of a Single Enterprise Agreement. The respondent, a union representing the employees, opposed the application. The case centred on whether the agreement met the requirements of Australian labour law for single enterprise agreements. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement provided for the terms and conditions of employment, was made in good faith, and was intended to be a single enterprise agreement. The Commission also needed to assess whether the agreement complied with minimum entitlements and if the application process was conducted appropriately.

The Commission considered the statutory requirements for approval, including the need for the agreement to provide for the terms and conditions of employment of the employees covered by the agreement, to be made in good faith, and to be intended as a single enterprise agreement. It also examined whether the agreement provided for minimum entitlements as prescribed by the Fair Work Act. The Commission looked into whether the application was made in accordance with the prescribed procedures and whether the agreement was genuinely a product of a single enterprise.

After reviewing the evidence and submissions, the Fair Work Commission found that the application met all the statutory requirements. The agreement was deemed to provide for the terms and conditions of employment, was made in good faith, and was intended to be a single enterprise agreement. The Commission also concluded that the agreement complied with minimum entitlements and that the application process was conducted appropriately. Consequently, the Commission approved the application for the Single Enterprise Agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the application for the Single Enterprise Agreement. This decision confirms the agreement as binding on the parties involved, effective from the date of approval. The agreement now sets out the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement, ensuring compliance with Australian labour law.

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.