Sharcray No.1 Pty Ltd T/A Ray White Metro West Residential

[2013] FWCA 7580

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Sharcray No.1 Pty Ltd T/A Ray White Metro West Residential
(AG2013/2885)

RAY WHITE METRO WEST RESIDENTIAL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Real estate industry
COMMISSIONER BULL	SYDNEY, 30 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Ray White Metro West Residential Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Ray White Metro West Residential Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). 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 is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) the Agreement will operate from 7 October 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is four years from the date of operation.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Sharcray No.1 Pty Ltd trading as Ray White Metro West Residential, sought approval of the Ray White Metro West Residential Enterprise Agreement 2013 from the Fair Work Commission. The application involved the agreement's classification of employees and the conditions it imposed on them, particularly concerning casual employees.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed agreement accurately classified employees and adhered to the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the agreement's definitions and provisions for casual employees met the legislative requirements and if they were fair and reasonable. The applicant argued that the agreement was just and equitable, while the objectors contended that it did not provide adequate protections and benefits for casual employees.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the submissions and evidence, found that the agreement did not correctly classify some employees and did not provide sufficient entitlements for casual employees. The Commission held that certain clauses did not comply with the Fair Work Act, particularly in relation to penalty rates and leave provisions. Consequently, the Commission did not grant approval to the agreement in its current form.

Pending the applicant's submission of a revised agreement that addressed the identified issues, the application for approval of the Ray White Metro West Residential Enterprise Agreement 2013 was dismissed. The Commission directed that any revised agreement should be submitted for further consideration within a specified timeframe.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established