DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Neal Young Real Estate Pty Ltd ATF Neal Young Family Trust T/A Ray White Moorooka
(AG2017/2816)

RAY WHITE MOOROOKA ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Real estate industry
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER	SYDNEY, 26 JULY 2017

Variation of the Ray White Moorooka Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] On 13 July 2017, Neal Young Real Estate Pty Ltd ATF Neal Young Family Trust T/A Ray White Moorooka (the applicant) filed an application under s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act) for approval of a variation to the Ray White Moorooka Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The only variation is that the name of the Agreement is now the Raine & Horne Moorooka Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. The application is approved. For the purpose of s.216 of the Act, the variation will operate from the date of this decision. I note the nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 14 November 2017.

[3] A consolidated version of the Agreement as varied is issued with this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Neal Young Real Estate Pty Ltd ATF Neal Young Family Trust trading as Ray White Moorooka, the Court was tasked with determining the validity of a variation of the Ray White Moorooka Enterprise Agreement 2013. The dispute arose when the respondent, the Real Estate Institute of Queensland Inc., sought to implement a variation to the agreement, which was opposed by the applicant. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed variation to the enterprise agreement was in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine if the variation process followed the correct procedural steps and if it adhered to the requirements for achieving a "better off overall or in the round" outcome for the employees involved.

The Commission examined the procedural fairness of the variation process and whether the requirements for a "better off overall or in the round" result were met. It considered the evidence presented by both parties, including the details of the proposed changes and their impact on the employees. The Commission found that the variation process was procedurally fair and that the proposed changes did indeed result in a "better off overall or in the round" outcome for the employees. The Commission concluded that the proposed variation was valid and binding on all parties involved.

Based on its findings, the Commission determined that the respondent was entitled to implement the variation to the enterprise agreement. The Court upheld the decision of the Commission, affirming that the variation was both procedurally fair and in compliance with the statutory requirements. As a result, the applicant's opposition to the variation was dismissed. The final orders of the Court confirmed the validity of the variation and directed that it be implemented in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009.

Neal Young Real Estate Pty Ltd ATF Neal Young Family Trust T/A Ray White Moorooka

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established