| [2018] FWCA 2105 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
SKYCITY Adelaide Casino Pty Ltd T/A Adelaide Casino
(AG2017/5122)
SKYCITY ADELAIDE CASINO/UNITED VOICE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2017
Hospitality industry | |
COMMISSIONER LEE | MELBOURNE, 12 APRIL 2018 |
Application for approval of the SKYCITY Adelaide Casino/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2017.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the SKYCITY Adelaide Casino/United Voice Enterprise Agreement 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by SKYCITY Adelaide Casino Pty Ltd T/A Adelaide Casino. 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 Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union and United Voice being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 April 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2020.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE427978 PR601950>
Annexure A
- AGLC
- SKYCITY Adelaide Casino Pty Ltd T/A Adelaide Casino [2018] FWCA 2105
- Case
- [2018] FWCA 2105
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues before the Commission were whether the enterprise agreement was made in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the process leading to the agreement was procedurally fair. The Commission had to consider if the agreement was genuinely negotiated and not merely imposed, and whether the bargaining process adhered to the requirements of good faith and procedural fairness. It also had to ensure that the agreement did not adversely affect employees' terms and conditions of employment below the minimum standards set by the relevant awards or the national workplace determination.
The Fair Work Commission determined that the enterprise agreement was validly made and approved it. The Commission found that the agreement was the result of genuine negotiations between the parties, with both sides demonstrating a willingness to reach a compromise. It concluded that the bargaining process was conducted in good faith and that the agreement did not result in employees being worse off. The Commission also noted that the agreement contained provisions that were consistent with the national workplace determination and did not breach any minimum standards. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, confirming its compliance with the necessary legal requirements.
No further orders were made beyond the approval of the enterprise agreement. The Commission's decision stands as a recognition of the validity and fairness of the agreement, ensuring that it is upheld as a binding contract between the parties.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.