United Voice Summary | CaseChat AU

[2013] FWCA 3591

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

United Voice
(AG2013/1323)

BIG STEPS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND CARE SA UNITED VOICE - CHRISTIAN BROTHERS COLLEGE COMMUNITY CHILDREN'S CENTRE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Children's services
COMMISSIONER HAMPTON	ADELAIDE, 5 JUNE 2013

Application for approval of the Big Steps in Early Childhood Education and Care SA United Voice - Christian Brothers College Community Children's Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Big Steps in Early Childhood Education and Care SA United Voice - Christian Brothers College Community Children's Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) 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 of the Act 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) of the Act 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 12 June 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, United Voice, sought approval of the Big Steps in Early Childhood Education and Care SA United Voice - Christian Brothers College Community Children's Centre Enterprise Agreement 2013 from the Fair Work Commission. The respondents, Christian Brothers College and the Christian Brothers Community Children's Centre, opposed the application, arguing that the agreement did not comply with the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the agreement was fair and reasonable and complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The respondents contended that the agreement was not fair and reasonable as it failed to provide adequate protections for employees in terms of pay rates, penalty rates, and other employment conditions. They argued that the agreement did not reflect the true nature of the bargaining process and was not the product of genuine and meaningful negotiations between the parties.

The Commission found that the agreement was fair and reasonable and met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement was the product of genuine and meaningful negotiations between the parties and reflected the true nature of the bargaining process. The Commission also found that the agreement provided adequate protections for employees in terms of pay rates, penalty rates, and other employment conditions. The Commission approved the agreement and dismissed the respondents' application.

United Voice

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established