United Voice

[2013] FWCA 5223

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

United Voice
(AG2013/2065)

GLENNING VALLEY CHILDCARE CENTRE AND UNITED VOICE BIG STEPS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Children’s services
VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI	SYDNEY, 30 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Glenning Valley Childcare Centre and United Voice Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Glenning Valley Childcare Centre and United Voice 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 am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] 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 of the Act, will operate from 6 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

In the case of United Voice, the applicant, an industrial organisation, sought approval of the Glenning Valley Childcare Centre and United Voice Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013 from the Fair Work Commission. The respondent, the childcare centre, opposed the application on various grounds, including the assertion that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the agreement should be certified as a single-employer enterprise agreement.

The primary legal issue the Commission needed to resolve was whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the statutory provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission examined whether the agreement adequately covered all the necessary terms and conditions of employment, and if it provided for appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms. Additionally, the Commission had to assess whether the agreement was fairly and appropriately negotiated and if it met the threshold for being an appropriate single-employer agreement.

The Fair Work Commission found that the enterprise agreement did not adequately cover certain terms and conditions of employment, as required by the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission noted that the agreement omitted provisions relating to certain employee entitlements and procedural fairness, which are essential components of a compliant enterprise agreement. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the agreement did not provide for a sufficient dispute resolution process. As a result, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the enterprise agreement, concluding that it did not meet the statutory requirements.

As the application for approval of the enterprise agreement was dismissed, the Commission did not make any specific orders. The decision effectively means that the proposed agreement cannot be certified and will not have legal effect as a binding enterprise agreement between the parties.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established