United Voice Summary | CaseChat AU

[2013] FWCA 5366

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

United Voice
(AG2013/7566)

ROWVILLE LAKES EARLY LEARNING CENTRE AND UNITED VOICE (VICTORIA) BIG STEPS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Children’s services
VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI	DARWIN, 5 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the Rowville Lakes Early Learning Centre and United Voice (Victoria) Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Rowville Lakes Early Learning Centre and United Voice (Victoria) Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by United Voice. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I have accepted the undertaking attached to this decision which has been given by the employer.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 12 August 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter involved an application by the Early Learning Centre at Rowville Lakes for approval of the Enterprise Agreement between United Voice (Victoria) and the centre. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary dispute centred on whether the Enterprise Agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly concerning the fairness and efficiency of the agreement provisions. The applicant argued that the agreement was necessary to achieve the desired operational efficiency, while United Voice contended that certain provisions did not meet the 'better off overall' test.

The legal issues that the Commission had to address included whether the agreement met the statutory requirements under section 234 of the Fair Work Act and whether the provisions in the agreement were fair and efficient. The Commission needed to determine if the agreement provided for fair and efficient terms and conditions for the employees, and whether it satisfied the 'better off overall' test. This test requires that the employees be no worse off and at least some employees be better off financially under the terms of the agreement compared to the applicable award or general awards.

The Commission concluded that the agreement was fair and efficient. It found that the agreement provided for terms and conditions that were no less favourable than the applicable award or general awards and that some employees were better off overall. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement achieved its intended purpose of providing for fair and efficient terms and conditions for the employees. Consequently, the Commission approved the Enterprise Agreement, finding it to be compliant with the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act.

United Voice

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established