The College of Law Limited Summary

[2013] FWCA 4959

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

The College of Law Limited
(AG2013/7388)

THE COLLEGE OF LAW ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Educational services
VICE PRESIDENT LAWLER	SYDNEY, 24 JULY 2013

Application for approval of The College of Law Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as The College of Law Enterprise Agreement 2013 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by The College of Law Limited. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] Subject to a concern that has been addressed by way of an undertaking, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] As noted, pursuant to s.190(3), I have accepted an undertaking from The College of Law Limited. In accordance with s.191(1) of the Act the undertaking is taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertaking is attached to this decision.

[4] The National Tertiary Education Industry Union (NTEU) being bargaining representatives 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 these organisations.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 31 July 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2016.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The College of Law Limited applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2013. The College of Law Limited, a provider of professional legal education, and the Australian Education Union were parties to the agreement. The union represented employees of the college who worked as academic staff, administrative staff and casual staff. The union sought to have the agreement approved by the Commission, and the college sought to have it disallowed on the basis that it did not contain a suitable mechanism for resolving disputes between the parties. The Fair Work Commission was the body with the authority to approve the agreement.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement contained a suitable mechanism for resolving disputes between the parties. The agreement provided for disputes to be referred to an independent mediator, and then, if necessary, to the Fair Work Commission. The college argued that this mechanism was not suitable because it did not provide for binding resolution of disputes. The union argued that the mechanism was suitable because it provided for independent and impartial resolution of disputes.

The Commission found that the mechanism for resolving disputes was suitable. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for independent mediation, which was an effective and efficient means of resolving disputes. The Commission also noted that the agreement provided for escalation to the Fair Work Commission if the dispute could not be resolved by mediation. The Commission concluded that the mechanism was suitable because it provided for independent and impartial resolution of disputes, and because it provided for binding resolution of disputes if necessary. The Commission approved the agreement.

The Commission ordered that the agreement be approved and registered. The agreement was to apply to all employees of the college who were members of the union. The agreement was to be registered with the Fair Work Commission and would be binding on all parties from the date of registration.

The College of Law Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established