DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino
(AG2016/2800)

CROWN MELBOURNE LIMITED (PROPERTY SERVICES AND TECHNICIANS) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Electrical contracting industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	SYDNEY, 18 MAY 2016

Application for approval of the Crown Melbourne Limited (Property Services & Technicians) Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Crown Melbourne Limited (Property Services & Technicians) Enterprise Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Crown Melbourne Limited t/a Crown Casino. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 25 May 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Crown Melbourne Limited, trading as Crown Casino, applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Crown Melbourne Limited (Property Services & Technicians) Enterprise Agreement 2015. The applicants, the Australian Licensed Employees’ Association and the Australian Workers’ Union, sought the agreement's approval on behalf of their members employed by Crown Melbourne. The respondents included Crown Melbourne Limited and the Property Services and Technicians Union. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions outlined in the proposed enterprise agreement, specifically addressing aspects such as pay rates, working conditions, and procedural fairness.

The legal issues before the court included whether the enterprise agreement met the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly sections concerning the procedural fairness of the agreement. The court needed to determine if the agreement was made in good faith and if it met the criteria for being a “better off overall test” for the employees. Additionally, the court had to assess if there was compliance with the procedural fairness provisions in the Fair Work Act, which required fair and genuine bargaining between the parties.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not meet the procedural fairness requirements as it was not genuinely bargained. The commission highlighted that the bargaining process was flawed due to the employer's failure to engage in good faith negotiations. Consequently, the court determined that the agreement could not be approved as it did not comply with the necessary legal standards. The commission's decision was based on evidence showing that Crown Melbourne did not genuinely bargain with the unions and failed to meet the statutory obligations under the Fair Work Act.

As a result, the application for the approval of the Crown Melbourne Limited (Property Services & Technicians) Enterprise Agreement 2015 was dismissed. The court's decision was based on the findings of non-compliance with procedural fairness and the failure to genuinely bargain, which rendered the agreement invalid under the Fair Work Act. The dismissal effectively meant that the proposed agreement would not come into effect, and the existing terms and conditions of employment remained in place.

Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established