The Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia Ltd Trading AS HCF

[2025] FWCA 2544

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

The Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia Ltd Trading AS HCF

(AG2025/2371)

HCF ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2025

Banking finance and insurance industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SAUNDERS	NEWCASTLE, 31 JULY 2025

Application for approval of the HCF Enterprise Agreement 2025

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the HCF Enterprise Agreement 2025 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

On the basis of the material before the Fair Work Commission, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of sections 186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of the Agreement have been met.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with section 54 of the Act, will operate from 7 August 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2028.

The Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice to the Fair Work Commission that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s 201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia Limited, trading as HCF, applied for approval of the HCF Enterprise Agreement 2025. The application was opposed by the Health Services Union of Australia (HSU). The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace, if it adequately considered the needs of low-wage and vulnerable workers, and if it allowed for necessary flexibility to adapt to future business needs. The Commission also examined whether the agreement contained provisions that could be seen as unreasonable, including those relating to working hours, shift penalties, and the classification of roles.

The Commission concluded that the agreement generally provided for a fair and efficient workplace and adequately considered the needs of low-wage and vulnerable workers. It found that while some provisions could be seen as harsh, they were necessary to ensure business flexibility and efficiency. The Commission approved the agreement, subject to minor modifications to certain clauses to address concerns about fairness and flexibility. These modifications included adjustments to shift penalties and the classification of certain roles to better reflect the nature of the work performed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established