Ardent Leisure T/A Dreamworld, WhiteWater World and SkyPoint

[2014] FWCA 1165

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Ardent Leisure T/A Dreamworld, WhiteWater World and SkyPoint
(AG2014/3638)

DREAMWORLD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT (NO 8) 2014

Amusement, events and recreation industry
COMMISSIONER SIMPSON	BRISBANE, 17 FEBRUARY 2014

Application for approval of the Dreamworld Enterprise Agreement (No 8) 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Dreamworld Enterprise Agreement (No 8) 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Ardent Leisure T/A Dreamworld, WhiteWater World and SkyPoint. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] On the basis of the material before me, 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] The Australian Workers’ Union, 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 will operate in accordance with s.54

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Ardent Leisure, trading as Dreamworld, WhiteWater World, and SkyPoint, and the Australian Workers Union. The dispute centres on the application for approval of the Dreamworld Enterprise Agreement (No 8) 2014. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, with the decision authored by Deputy President M.A.L. Edwards. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the application met the legal requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court needed to examine whether the application was made in accordance with the Act, and whether the agreement was likely to result in improved workplace relations and better terms and conditions for employees.

The primary legal issues revolved around whether the application for approval was correctly made under section 233 of the Act, and whether the agreement provided for improved workplace relations and better terms and conditions for employees. The court also had to consider whether the application complied with the procedural requirements outlined in the Fair Work Regulations 2009. Further, it was necessary to assess whether the agreement provided for appropriate mechanisms for the resolution of workplace disputes and the protection of employees' rights.

The Commission found that the application was validly made and complied with the requirements of the Act and the Regulations. The Deputy President concluded that the proposed agreement would lead to better workplace relations and improved terms and conditions for employees. The court highlighted that the agreement included provisions for dispute resolution and the protection of employees' rights, which were in line with the objectives of the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the Commission approved the Dreamworld Enterprise Agreement (No 8) 2014, confirming that it met the legal standards for approval. The decision ensures that the agreement will be implemented, bringing about the intended improvements in workplace relations and employee conditions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established