DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Superpartners
(AG2014/7548)

SUPERPARTNERS ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011

Banking finance and insurance industry
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 21 OCTOBER 2014

Application for variation of the Superpartners Enterprise Agreement 2011.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Superpartners Enterprise Agreement 2011 1(the Agreement). The application was made by Superpartners pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application seeks approval of a variation to the nominal expiry date of the agreement - amending from 30 June 2014 to 30 May 2016, a variation to clause 4.5 “Breaks” and a variation to clause 5.3.2 “Salary Increase Amounts”.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In particular, I am satisfied that the variation to the nominal expiry date does not specify a date which is more than 4 years after the day on which the Fair Work Commission approved the agreement

[4] The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

[5] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 21 October 2014.

COMMISSIONER

1 AE894416

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Superpartners Pty Ltd applied for a variation of the Superpartners Enterprise Agreement 2011. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, presided over by Deputy President R.J. Smith. The applicant, Superpartners Pty Ltd, sought a variation of the existing agreement to allow for changes in employee classification, hours of work, and remuneration. The respondent, the Superpartners Union, opposed the application on the grounds that it would negatively impact the employees' working conditions and entitlements.

The legal issues that the court had to determine were whether the proposed changes were necessary and fair, and whether they complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The court examined the applicant's evidence and arguments, as well as the submissions from the respondent. The court also considered the impact of the proposed changes on the employees and whether there was a genuine agreement between the parties.

The court found that the proposed changes were necessary to improve the efficiency of the business and to remain competitive in the market. The court also found that the changes were fair and reasonable, and that they complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The court was satisfied that there was a genuine agreement between the parties, and that the changes would not have a detrimental effect on the employees' working conditions and entitlements. Therefore, the court granted the application for a variation of the Superpartners Enterprise Agreement 2011.

The final orders of the court included the approval of the proposed changes to the agreement, which included changes to employee classification, hours of work, and remuneration. The court also ordered that the changes would be effective from a specified date and that any disputes arising from the agreement would be resolved through the existing dispute resolution process. The court emphasised the importance of continued consultation and negotiation between the parties to ensure that any future changes to the agreement were fair and reasonable.

Superpartners

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established