DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Secure Melbourne Protective Services Pty Ltd T/A SPL Security Group
(AG2014/8322)

SPL SECURITY GROUP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Security services
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 14 JANUARY 2015

Application for approval of the SPL Security Group Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the SPL Security Group Enterprise Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Secure Melbourne Protective Services Pty Ltd T/A SPL Security Group. 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] The Agreement does not contain a consultation provision in the terms of s.205 of the Act. 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 21 January 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 November 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Secure Melbourne Protective Services Pty Ltd, trading as SPL Security Group, sought approval of its Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant, a security services provider, entered into the agreement with the Australian Services Union, which represented its employees. The dispute was brought before the Fair Work Commission, an Australian federal body with jurisdiction to resolve workplace disputes and approve enterprise agreements. The central issue before the Commission was whether the Enterprise Agreement 2014 complied with the relevant statutory requirements and was fair and reasonable in all its terms and conditions.

The Commission examined whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009, including whether it provided for the terms and conditions of employment of the employees, whether it allowed for the genuine resolution of workplace disputes, and whether it was free from any unfair provisions. The Commission also considered submissions from both parties, including arguments about the agreement's provisions on wages, hours of work, and other employment conditions. The applicant argued that the agreement was necessary to ensure the company's continued operation and to provide certainty for both the employer and employees. The union, on the other hand, raised concerns about the agreement's impact on employee conditions.

After careful consideration of the evidence and arguments presented, the Commission found that the Enterprise Agreement 2014 met the statutory requirements for approval. The Commission concluded that the agreement provided for the terms and conditions of employment in a fair and reasonable manner, allowed for the genuine resolution of workplace disputes, and did not contain any unfair provisions. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for a reasonable balance of rights and obligations between the parties and took into account the needs of both the employer and employees. The Commission approved the agreement, and it became legally binding on the parties from the date of the decision.

Secure Melbourne Protective Services Pty Ltd T/A SPL Security Group

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established