| [2025] FWCA 326 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Woolworths Group Limited
(AG2024/5285)
WODONGA REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION CENTRE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2024
| Storage services industry | |
| COMMISSIONER SLOAN | SYDNEY, 28 JANUARY 2025 |
Application for approval of the Wodonga Regional Distribution Centre Enterprise Agreement 2024
Woolworths Group Limited has applied for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Wodonga Regional Distribution Centre Enterprise Agreement 2024 (“Agreement”). The application is made under s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“Act”). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.
The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees’ Association (“SDA”) and the United Workers Union (“UWU”) were bargaining representatives for the Agreement. The UWU supports approval of the Agreement. The SDA has neither supported nor opposed the application.
Woolworths issued the Notice of Employee Representational Rights (“NERR”) on 3 July 2024. The NERR gave notice that it was bargaining in relation to an agreement “which is proposed to cover employees that are employed at the Wodonga Regional Distribution Centre…whose rates of pay and conditions are prescribed by the agreement”. However, there is no evidence that at that time the employees had a copy of the proposed agreement so as to know whether their terms and conditions were prescribed by it. It follows that it is not clear how employees would have been aware at the time of receiving the NERR, other than through having done so, that Woolworths intended the proposed agreement to apply to them.
That said, noting the involvement of the SDA and USU, I consider this to be a minor procedural or technical error of the nature contemplated by s 188(5) of the Act and am satisfied that the employees are not likely to have been disadvantaged by the error. I will consequently disregard it.
Clause 2.5.1 of the Agreement deals with termination of employment. It provides that if an employee fails to give the required notice, Woolworths may withhold monies due to them in an amount equal to the notice not provided. The clause further allows Woolworths to make a “payroll deduction” to recover any money owed by an employee to Woolworths at the time of termination. The clause does not limit any withholding or deductions to an employee’s wages. As a result, it might be construed as permitting deductions from amounts that the employee is entitled to receive on termination under the National Employment Standards (“NES”).
Having noted that, clause 1.7 of the Agreement provides that where there is an inconsistency between the Agreement and the NES, and the NES provides a greater benefit to employees, the NES will prevail to the extent of the inconsistency. This should ensure that clause 2.5.1 is not applied in a manner contrary to the NES. In raising the issue, it is my intention to ensure that this is the case.
Having regard to the material in the application and accompanying declaration, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss 186, 187, 188 and 190 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval have been met.
The SDA and the UWU have each given notice under s 183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. As required by s 201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the SDA and the UWU.
The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s 54 of the Act, the Agreement will operate from 4 February 2025. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 August 2026.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE527784 PR783713>
- AGLC
- Woolworths Group Limited [2025] FWCA 326
- Case
- [2025] FWCA 326
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues before the FWC involved whether the agreement satisfied the procedural and substantive requirements for approval. Procedurally, the FWC had to be satisfied that the agreement was made in good faith and through proper bargaining processes. Substantively, the agreement needed to include minimum entitlements, ensure procedural fairness, and avoid provisions that were contrary to public policy or unjust. The FWC also had to consider the impact of the agreement on the employees and the broader industrial relations system.
In making its decision, the FWC considered the evidence presented by both parties and the statutory criteria outlined in the Fair Work Act. The FWC found that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and met the procedural requirements. It also determined that the agreement provided for minimum entitlements and adhered to procedural fairness. The FWC concluded that the agreement did not include any provisions that were contrary to public policy or unjust. Given these findings, the FWC approved the Wodonga Regional Distribution Centre Enterprise Agreement 2024.
The FWC made an order approving the Wodonga Regional Distribution Centre Enterprise Agreement 2024, effective from the date of the decision. This decision provides clarity for both the employer and the employees regarding their rights and obligations under the new agreement.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.