Employment and Labor Law

Are your employees better off overall?

Penny Brooke, Senior Associate, considers the refusal of the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission to approve the Coles Store Team Enterprise Agreement 2014-17 after Coles failed to prove that employees were better off overall under the proposed enterprise agreement.

A Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission (Commission) refused to approve the Coles Store Team Enterprise Agreement 2014-17 (Agreement).  The Commission was not satisfied that the higher ordinary rate of pay plus the additional entitlements provided by the Agreement meant that, at the test time, each award covered employee, and each prospective award covered employee for the Agreement, would be better off overall, as compared with the General Retail Industry Award (Award).

  • to increase the casual loading to 25%;
  • to raise the percentage pay rate for 17 and 18 year olds (non-trades) to 60% and 70% respectively; and
  • that provision would be made for a reconciliation term for casual and junior (non-trades) employees to ensure that the take home pay for any four week roster cycle under the Agreement would be greater than what they would otherwise have been entitled to under the Award.

Commissioner Bull also expressed concern regarding the consultation clause contained in the Agreement as not complying with the requirement to consult with employees with respect to changes to an employee’s regular roster or ordinary hours of work.  Coles argued that another clause in the Agreement satisfied that obligation and provided an undertaking that during a consultation process regarding changes to rosters or ordinary hours, employees could be represented.  However, errors in the consultation clause cannot be remedied by undertakings, and so Commissioner Bull ordered that the model consultation term at Schedule 2.3 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 was taken to be a term of the Agreement.

Read the entire article.

< Back