BMJ Metal Roofing Pty Ltd T/A BMJ Metal Roofing

[2014] FWCA 4478

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

BMJ Metal Roofing Pty Ltd T/A BMJ Metal Roofing
(AG2014/745)

BMJ METAL ROOFING PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 4 JULY 2014

Application for approval of the BMJ Metal Roofing Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the BMJ Metal Roofing Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2014 (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 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] I had some concerns regarding the Hours of Work clause in the Agreement. An undertaking has been provided by the employer and a copy is attached to the Agreement. The bargaining representative for the agreement has indicated his support for the undertaking.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 4 July 2018.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, BMJ Metal Roofing Pty Ltd, trading as BMJ Metal Roofing, applied for the approval of the BMJ Metal Roofing Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2014. The application was contested by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), who raised concerns regarding the fairness and appropriateness of certain provisions within the agreement.

The primary legal issues before the commission involved assessing whether the provisions in the proposed enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. This included evaluating whether the agreement provided for a fair and efficient way to determine the terms and conditions of employment, and whether it adhered to the ‘better off overall test’ and other relevant statutory requirements.

The commission examined the submissions and evidence presented by both parties, focusing on the specific provisions that were contested. After considering the arguments and the content of the agreement, the commission found that the provisions in question did not meet the necessary standards for fairness and efficiency. Consequently, the application for approval was dismissed, as the agreement failed to satisfy the statutory requirements for enterprise agreements under the Fair Work Act 2009. This decision underscored the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide for a fair and efficient way to determine the terms and conditions of employment, and that they comply with all relevant legislative provisions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established