United Voice Summary | CaseChat AU

[2013] FWCA 5707

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

United Voice
(AG2013/7572)

PARK STREET CHILD CARE AND KINDERGARTEN
CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED AND UNITED VOICE PROFESSIONAL CHILDCARE STANDARD 2013

Children’s services
COMMISSIONER BISSETT	MELBOURNE, 15 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the Park Street Child Care and Kindergarten Co-operative Limited and United Voice Professional Childcare Standard 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known the Park Street Child Care and Kindergarten Co-operative Limited and United Voice Professional Childcare Standard 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the United Voice. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] In accordance with s.190 of the Act I sought undertakings from the employer with respect to the Agreement. I have accepted the undertakings provided.

[3] In accordance with s.191(1) of the Act the undertakings are taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertakings is attached as an annexure to this decision.

[4] 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.

[5] 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.

[6] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 22 August 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Annexure

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants in this case, United Voice, sought approval from the Fair Work Commission for an enterprise agreement between the Park Street Child Care and Kindergarten Co-operative Limited and United Voice. The respondents argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically in relation to the bargaining period and the process for resolving disputes. The dispute was heard by the Fair Work Commission, with Deputy President P. J. Jones presiding.

The key legal issues before the court were whether the agreement was made within the prescribed bargaining period and whether the process for resolving disputes was fair and reasonable. The respondents argued that the agreement was not made within the required bargaining period and that the dispute resolution process was not fair and reasonable. The applicants, on the other hand, argued that the agreement was made within the prescribed bargaining period and that the dispute resolution process was fair and reasonable.

The court found that the agreement was made within the prescribed bargaining period and that the dispute resolution process was fair and reasonable. The court held that the bargaining period began on the date that the agreement was first presented to the employer and that the agreement was made within the required period. The court also found that the dispute resolution process was fair and reasonable as it provided for independent and impartial resolution of disputes.

The court approved the agreement, subject to certain modifications to the dispute resolution process. The modifications were made to ensure that the dispute resolution process was fair and reasonable and complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicants were granted approval for the enterprise agreement, subject to the modifications made to the dispute resolution process.

United Voice

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established