The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd T/A Ruby Manor

Case [2021] FWCA 6198


[2021] FWCA 6198
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd T/A Ruby Manor
(AG2021/6906)

THE SISTERS OF OUR LADY OF CHINA HEALTH CARE (2) T/AS RUBY MANOR, NSWNMA AND HSU NEW SOUTH WALES BRANCH ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2020

Aged care industry

COMMISSIONER MATHESON

SYDNEY, 8 OCTOBER 2021

Application for approval of The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) t/as Ruby Manor, NSWNMA and HSU New South Wales Branch Enterprise Agreement 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) t/as Ruby Manor, NSWNMA and HSU New South Wales Branch Enterprise Agreement 2020 (Agreement). The application was made by The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd (Applicant) pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] Clause 4 of the Agreement names the employer as ‘The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care Pty Ltd’. The name of the Applicant is ‘The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd’. The Applicant confirmed that the name of the employer in the Agreement was an error and applied for a correction pursuant to s.586 of the Act so that:

(a) The definition of ‘Employer’ in Clause 3.2 of the Agreement states ‘Employer means The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd and has the meaning in the Act’.

(b) Clause 4.1(a) of the Agreement states ‘The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd (“the Employer”)’.

[3] I am satisfied that this amendment should be allowed and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act. I make the amendment.

[4] Clause 12.3(b) of the Agreement contains an apparent error stating:

‘Before commencing part-time employment, the Employer and Employee will agree in writing the guaranteed minimum number of hours to be worked hours to be worked and the days of the week and shifts that will be worked’ (emphasis added).

[5] The Applicant applied for a correction seeking that the Commission exercise its powers pursuant to s.586 of the Act so that the clause reads:

‘Before commencing part-time employment, the Employer and Employee will agree in writing the guaranteed minimum number of hours to be worked and the days of the week and shifts that will be worked’.

[6] I am satisfied that this amendment should be allowed and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act. I make the amendment.

[7] Clause 38.1 of the Agreement prescribes shift penalties. The table in clause 38.1(a) contains the words:

‘Afternoon shift commencing after 10.00 a.m. and before 1:00 p.m’ (emphasis added).

[8] The Applicant applied for a correction seeking that the Commission exercise its powers pursuant to s.586 of the Act so that the clause reads:

‘Afternoon shift commencing at 10.00 a.m. and before 1:00 p.m’.

[9] I am satisfied that this amendment should be allowed and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act. I make the amendment.

[10] I observe that certain provisions of the Agreement may be inconsistent with the National Employment Standards (NES). However, noting clause 6.2 of the Agreement, I am satisfied that the more beneficial entitlements of the NES will prevail where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES.

[11] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached at Annexure A of this decision (Undertakings). I am satisfied that the effect of accepting the Undertakings is not likely to:

(a) cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement; or

(b) result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[12] Pursuant to s.190(3) of the Act, I accept the Undertakings.

[13] Subject to the Undertakings, and on the basis of the materials before the Commission, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval of the Agreement have been met.

[14] The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation New South Wales Branch and Health Services Union NSW Branch, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them.  In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisations.

[15] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 October 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2024.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE513441 PR734735>

Annexure A

Details
AGLC
The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd T/A Ruby Manor [2021] FWCA 6198
Case
[2021] FWCA 6198
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Sisters of Our Lady of China Health Care (2) Pty Ltd, trading as Ruby Manor, made an application to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the NSW Nurses and Midwives’ Association and Health Services Union of Australia New South Wales Branch Enterprise Agreement 2020. The application was contested by the Australian Medical Association (NSW), which raised objections to the agreement on the grounds that it did not adequately protect the interests of medical practitioners employed by Ruby Manor. The dispute was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which was required to determine whether the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement contained terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable, and that complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act. The Commission had to consider the various provisions of the agreement, including those relating to employment conditions, wages and other benefits, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The Commission also had to consider the submissions made by the parties, and any relevant evidence or arguments.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented by the parties, the Commission found that the agreement was fair and reasonable, and that it complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement, and that it included appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms. The Commission also found that the agreement did not contain any terms that were contrary to the public interest, and that it did not have any adverse effects on the operation of the business. As a result, the Commission approved the agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the NSW Nurses and Midwives’ Association and Health Services Union of Australia New South Wales Branch Enterprise Agreement 2020, subject to certain modifications. The modifications related to the definition of “medical practitioner” and the process for resolving disputes between medical practitioners and Ruby Manor. The Commission also made an order that the agreement be registered with the Fair Work Commission, and that it be given effect from the date of the Commission’s decision. The Australian Medical Association (NSW) was granted leave to appeal the decision to the Federal Court of Australia.

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.