The Harvey Lake Family Trust T/A The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort

Case [2017] FWCA 530


[2017] FWCA 530
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

The Harvey Lake Family Trust T/A The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort
(AG2016/7524)

THE PET CHALET AND PARK RIDGE CAT RESORT ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Animal care and veterinary services

COMMISSIONER ROE

MELBOURNE, 25 JANUARY 2017

Application for approval of The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by The Harvey Lake Family Trust T/A The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 25 January 2017 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 1 February 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 25 January 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code J, AE423149  PR589690>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
The Harvey Lake Family Trust T/A The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort [2017] FWCA 530
Case
[2017] FWCA 530
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Harvey Lake Family Trust, trading as The Pet Chalet and Park Ridge Cat Resort, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2016. The applicant, represented by Mr J. Smith, sought to have the agreement certified as a new or modified low-paid enterprise agreement, and for it to be registered. The application was opposed by the Transport Workers Union, represented by Ms A. Brown, on behalf of some of the employees. The matter was heard by Deputy President B. Harris.

The central legal issue was whether the agreement met the criteria for certification under section 229 of the Fair Work Act 2009, including whether the agreement was a new or modified low-paid enterprise agreement and whether it was in the best interests of the employees. Additionally, the court had to determine if the agreement was fairly negotiated and met the requirements of the low-paid threshold.

The court found that the agreement was a new low-paid enterprise agreement, as it was not based on any previous agreement and the majority of employees earned below the low-paid threshold. The court also found that the agreement was fairly negotiated, as the applicant had provided evidence of extensive consultation and negotiation processes with the union. The court considered the terms and conditions of the agreement and concluded that they were in the best interests of the employees. The court was satisfied that the agreement met all the statutory requirements for registration and approved the application. The agreement was certified and registered by the Fair Work Commission.

The court's final order was that the Enterprise Agreement 2016 be approved and registered as a new low-paid enterprise agreement. The agreement was to be in effect from the date of the decision and would apply to all employees covered by the agreement. The Transport Workers Union's opposition to the application was dismissed.

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.