DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Jellis Craig North Side (Sales) Pty Ltd T/A Jellis Craig North Side
(AG2016/7803)

JELLIS CRAIG (NORTH SIDE) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Real estate industry
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 16 MARCH 2017

Application for approval of the Jellis Craig (North Side) Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Jellis Craig (North Side) Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Jellis Craig North Side (Sales) Pty Ltd T/A Jellis Craig North Side . The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 23 March 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 15 March 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jellis Craig North Side (Sales) Pty Ltd T/A Jellis Craig North Side applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Jellis Craig (North Side) Enterprise Agreement 2016. The applicants are an agency that provides real estate services and the respondents are the employees of the agency who are members of the Australian Services Union (ASU). The dispute is concerned with the approval of a proposed enterprise agreement. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The key legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace, whether it met the minimum safety net of entitlements, and whether it was appropriately certified. The ASU argued that the proposed agreement did not provide fair and efficient workplaces, did not meet the minimum safety net of entitlements, and was not appropriately certified. The applicants maintained that the agreement met all statutory requirements for approval.

The Commission found that the proposed enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval. The agreement provided for fair and efficient workplaces by setting out terms and conditions that were considered reasonable in the circumstances. The Commission also found that the agreement met the minimum safety net of entitlements, and that it had been appropriately certified by the relevant authorities. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace, met the minimum safety net of entitlements, and was appropriately certified.

Accordingly, the Fair Work Commission approved the Jellis Craig (North Side) Enterprise Agreement 2016. The Commission found that the agreement met all statutory requirements for approval and was in the best interests of the employees and the applicants. The Commission's decision was based on a thorough consideration of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, and it represents an important outcome for the applicants and their employees.

Jellis Craig North Side (Sales) Pty Ltd T/A Jellis Craig North Side

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established