DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

The GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd
(AG2015/3198)

JUNEE CORRECTIONAL CENTRE - CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS - 2015 ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT

Corrections and detentions
COMMISSIONER MCKENNA	SYDNEY, 10 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Junee Correctional Centre - Correctional Officers - 2015 Enterprise Agreement.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Junee Correctional Centre - Correctional Officers - 2015 Enterprise Agreement (“the Agreement”). The application has been made by the GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd (“the applicant”) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”). 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 relevant to this application for approval has been met. The applicant has provided written undertakings addressing miscellaneous matters. A copy of the undertakings is attached to this decision and marked “Annexure A”. I note that, under s.191 of the Act, the undertakings are taken to be terms of the Agreement. Although the Agreement contains arrangements that potentially raise issues in relation to the base rates of pay for trainee correctional officers, I would otherwise note s.206 of the Act will apply where such issues arise.

[3] United Voice - NSW Branch concurs with the undertakings and has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wishes to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date is 24 May 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Annexure A

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd, an operator of correctional facilities, applied for approval of the Junee Correctional Centre 2015 Enterprise Agreement, which outlined the terms and conditions of employment for correctional officers at the centre. The application was made to the Fair Work Commission under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Australian Council of Trade Unions and the Public Service Association of New South Wales opposed the application, arguing that the agreement did not adequately protect the interests of the correctional officers.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement provided for the employees' pay and conditions in a fair and reasonable manner, as required by section 234 of the Fair Work Act. This involved examining whether the agreement contained provisions that were procedurally and substantively fair. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, given the balance of benefits and detriments to them.

The Commission found that the enterprise agreement was procedurally fair, as it had been negotiated in good faith and included adequate consultation with the employees. It determined that the agreement was substantively fair, as it provided for reasonable terms and conditions of employment, including provisions for wages, leave, and other entitlements. The Commission also concluded that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, as it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, taking into account the overall balance of benefits and detriments.

The Commission approved the enterprise agreement, subject to certain modifications to address the concerns raised by the unions. These modifications included changes to the provisions relating to shift patterns, overtime, and the use of casual employees. The modifications were designed to ensure that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, while also taking into account the needs of the employer and the employees.

The GEO Group Australia Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established