DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Silverstrand Developments Pty Ltd
(AG2016/444)

SILVERSTRAND DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 - 2020

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 28 APRIL 2016

Application for approval of the Silverstrand Developments Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 - 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Silverstrand Developments Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 - 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Silverstrand Developments Pty Ltd. 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 Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 5 May 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 27 April 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Silverstrand Developments Pty Ltd was the subject of an application before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for approval of the Enterprise Agreement 2016-2020. The applicant, Silverstrand Developments, is an employer, and the respondent, Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU), represents the employees. The dispute centred around whether the agreement met the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 for approval and registration.

The key legal issues before the FWC were whether the Enterprise Agreement contained all the permissible provisions, was made in good faith, and whether it met the minimum standards prescribed by the Act. The CFMMEU raised concerns about certain clauses in the agreement, arguing they were not permissible or were not made in good faith. Additionally, the union contended that some provisions did not comply with the minimum standards, including those related to termination, redundancy, and shift penalties.

The FWC considered the submissions from both parties and examined the provisions of the agreement in detail. The Commission found that some of the contested clauses were not permissible as they exceeded the scope of what is allowed under the Act. However, it also determined that the majority of the agreement, including the contested provisions, was made in good faith. The FWC further concluded that the agreement met the minimum standards and did not disadvantage employees in a manner inconsistent with the Act. Consequently, the FWC approved the Enterprise Agreement 2016-2020 and ordered its registration.

In summary, the FWC approved the Enterprise Agreement after finding that, while some clauses were impermissible, the overall agreement was made in good faith and met the minimum standards required by the Fair Work Act. The agreement was subsequently registered, providing a legally binding framework for the employment relationship between Silverstrand Developments and its employees represented by the CFMMEU.

Silverstrand Developments Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established