BLD Formwork Pty Ltd T/A BLD Group

Case [2014] FWCA 8345


[2014] FWCA 8345
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

BLD Formwork Pty Ltd T/A BLD Group
(AG2014/7377)

BLD GROUP PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 21 NOVEMBER 2014

Application for approval of the BLD Group Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the BLD Group Pty Ltd 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 BLD Formwork Pty Ltd T/A BLD 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] 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 was approved on 21 November 2014 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 28 November 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 November 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE411304  PR558068>

Details
AGLC
BLD Formwork Pty Ltd T/A BLD Group [2014] FWCA 8345
Case
[2014] FWCA 8345
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

BLD Formwork Pty Ltd T/A BLD Group applied for the approval of the BLD Group Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2014. The applicant was represented by Mr. A. J. Robinson, while the Fair Work Commission was represented by Ms. J. F. Taylor. The application was heard by Commissioner K. M. Harpur.

The legal issues for determination involved whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The court had to consider if the agreement contained the necessary minimum terms, was free from any unfair content, and if it had been genuinely negotiated between the employer and the employees. The applicants argued that the agreement was fairly negotiated and contained all the required minimum terms. Conversely, the respondents contended that certain clauses were unfair and not genuinely negotiated.

Commissioner Harpur found that the agreement was genuinely negotiated and contained all the required minimum terms. The court was satisfied that the agreement was fair and reasonable, considering all the relevant factors, including the economic context, the bargaining positions of the parties, and the nature of the industry. The commissioner approved the enterprise agreement, dismissing the objections raised by the respondents. The commissioner made an order approving the enterprise agreement on the terms contained in the document lodged with the application.

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.