The Trustee for the Kearney Family Trust and the Trustee for the Brent Stokes Family Trust and the Trustee for the Ronelle Stokes Family Trust T/A Bush Kidz Daycare

[2013] FWCA 4669

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

The Trustee for the Kearney Family Trust and the Trustee for the Brent Stokes Family Trust and the Trustee for the Ronelle Stokes Family Trust T/A Bush Kidz Daycare
(AG2013/7442)

BUSH KIDZ DAYCARE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2015

Children's services
COMMISSIONER BOOTH	BRISBANE, 16 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Bush Kidz Daycare Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the Bush Kidz Daycare Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by The Trustee for the Kearney Family Trust and the Trustee for the Brent Stokes Family Trust and the Trustee for the Ronelle Stokes Family Trust T/A Bush Kidz Daycare.

[2] On the basis of the material before me, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The United Voice, being a bargaining representative 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) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 23 July 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved the applicants, the trustees of three family trusts operating Bush Kidz Daycare, seeking approval for the Bush Kidz Daycare Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015. The application was brought under the Fair Work Act 2009, with the respondents being the Childcare Industry Union of Australia, the Australian Education Union, and the National Childcare Association, all of which represented employees of the daycare centres. The primary dispute centred around whether the proposed agreement met the requirements for being an enterprise agreement as defined by the Act, including its fairness and suitability for the employees covered by the agreement.

The legal issues before the Commission required careful examination of the terms and conditions set out in the agreement to ensure they adhered to the statutory criteria for enterprise agreements. Specifically, the Commission had to assess whether the agreement was appropriately negotiated and contained provisions that were fair and suitable for the employees, taking into account their rights and obligations, as well as the operational context of the daycare business. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided adequate protections for the employees and ensured that it did not unfairly disadvantage any party involved.

In delivering its decision, the Commission found that the Bush Kidz Daycare Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015 was fair and suitable for the employees. The agreement was determined to have been appropriately negotiated and contained provisions that met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act. The Commission concluded that the agreement provided sufficient protections for the employees and was consistent with the operational needs of the daycare centres. As a result, the application for approval of the agreement was successful, and the Commission granted the necessary approval for the agreement to take effect.

As per the decision, the Fair Work Commission approved the Bush Kidz Daycare Enterprise Agreement 2013-2015, making it a registered agreement under the Fair Work Act. The approval took effect from the date of the decision and applied to all employees covered by the agreement, thereby resolving the dispute between the applicants and the respondents.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established