United Voice Summary | CaseChat AU

[2013] FWCA 4424

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

United Voice
(AG2013/1670)

CHAMBERLAIN EARLY LEARNING CENTRE AND UNITED VOICE BIG STEPS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Children’s services
VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI	SYDNEY, 4 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Chamberlain Early Learning Centre and United Voice Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Application for approval of the Chamberlain Early Learning 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] 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 of the Act, will operate from 11 July 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

United Voice, on behalf of employees at the Chamberlain Early Learning Centre, sought approval for the United Voice Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was opposed by the employer, who argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission heard the matter, with the central issue being whether the agreement fulfilled the statutory criteria for approval.

The Commission examined whether the agreement contained the necessary minimum terms and conditions, including those prescribed by the National Employment Standards and the Fair Work Act. The court also assessed whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether it complied with procedural requirements such as proper notification and opportunity for review. The Commission concluded that the agreement was properly negotiated and contained all required minimum terms, but had procedural shortcomings that did not warrant refusal of approval. The Commission's reasoning was based on the overall fairness and compliance of the agreement's terms.

Ultimately, the Fair Work Commission approved the United Voice Big Steps Enterprise Agreement 2013, subject to certain modifications to address the procedural issues identified. This decision recognised the balance between ensuring procedural fairness and upholding the substantive fairness of the negotiated agreement. The court's final orders included the approval of the agreement with the specified modifications, ensuring that it met the legal requirements while protecting the interests of both parties.

United Voice

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established