United Voice Summary | CaseChat AU

[2013] FWCA 7148

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.217—Enterprise agreement

United Voice
(AG2013/8796)

EAST MELBOURNE CHILD CARE CO-OPERATIVE AND UNITED VOICE PROFESSIONAL CHILDCARE STANDARD 2013

Children’s services
VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI	BRISBANE, 19 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for variation of the East Melbourne Child Care Co-operative and United Voice Professional Childcare Standard 2013.

[1] An application has been made to vary the East Melbourne Child Care Co-operative and United Voice Professional Childcare Standard 2013 (the Agreement) to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty. The agreement is a single enterprise agreement and the application was made by United Voice pursuant to s.217 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] United Voice is covered by the Agreement and was initially the applicant to approve the agreement at first instance.

[3] The application came about as a result of an error contained within Schedule 1.4 of the Agreement which resulted in wage rises for two classifications depicted in the “Early Years Quality Fund Wage Rate Schedule” table being inconsistent with the “funding agreement” provided by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations under the Early Years Quality Fund.

[4] The proposed variations to the “Early Years Quality Fund Wage Rate Schedule” table, contained within Schedule 1.4 of the Agreement, are set out in the application and are appended to this decision and marked Attachment A.

[5] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.217 of the Act have been met. Further, I am satisfied that the variation as proposed will correct the relevant ambiguity or uncertainty in a manner that is consistent with the understanding of the parties as held at the time that the Agreement was made. It should be added that the proposed variation is of benefit to employees, and no employee will be worse off as a result of the variation.

[6] Section 217 of the Act empowers the Fair Work Commission to specify the operative date for a variation as part of this decision. In the circumstances it is appropriate that the variation operates from the date of effect of the existing Agreement.

[7] Accordingly, the Agreement is hereby varied in accordance with Attachment A and the variation will operate on and from 29 August 2013.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ATTACHMANT A

Early Years Quality Fund Wage Rate Schedule

Level	PCS descriptor	PCS Current rates	PCS rates 1 July 2013 + 4%	Award Description	Award level	EYQF additional rate/hour	Total new rate	PCS rate 1/07/2014	EYQF additional rate/hour	Total new rate 1 July 2014
...
5.4 (minimum rate 3 year degree equiv.)	4th year	$25.65	$26.68	$4.28	$30.96	$27.74	$4.28	$32.02
5.5 (minimum rate 3 year degree equiv.)	5th year	$26.83	$27.91	$4.28	$32.19	$29.02	$4.28	$33.30
...

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of United Voice involved an application for the variation of the East Melbourne Child Care Co-operative and United Voice Professional Childcare Standard 2013. This application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the proposed changes to the standard were fair and reasonable. The dispute centred on whether the proposed adjustments to the employment conditions within the child care industry were justified and necessary. The primary parties involved were the East Melbourne Child Care Co-operative, representing the child care providers, and United Voice, the union advocating for the workers' interests. The court needed to weigh the implications of the proposed changes on both the employers and the employees.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the proposed variations were procedurally fair and whether they were substantively fair. Procedural fairness involved examining whether the process through which the application was made and the consultation with relevant parties were adequate and transparent. Substantive fairness required the court to assess whether the changes would impact the employment conditions in a manner that was justifiable and equitable for both the child care providers and the employees. The court also had to consider the balance of interests between the two parties and the broader implications for the child care industry.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the application process was procedurally fair, as there was sufficient consultation and transparency in the process. The court then moved on to assess the substantive fairness of the proposed changes. After careful consideration of the evidence and submissions from both parties, the court determined that the proposed variations were substantively fair. The court found that the changes were necessary to address issues within the industry and would not unduly harm either party. The court also highlighted the importance of maintaining a balance between the interests of child care providers and the rights of employees. Ultimately, the court approved the application for variation, allowing the new conditions to come into effect.

No additional final orders were made beyond the approval of the application for variation. The decision emphasised the need for ongoing dialogue and negotiation between the parties to ensure that employment conditions in the child care industry remain fair and reasonable.

United Voice

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established