DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd
(AG2015/2866)

CFC CONSOLIDATED PTY LTD - DARWIN DRIVERS FREIGHT OFFICERS AND WORKSHOP ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014

Road transport industry
COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN	PERTH, 15 JUNE 2015

Variation of enterprise agreement.

[1] This is an application by CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd (Applicant) for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement.

[2] The enterprise agreement is the CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd - Darwin Drivers, Freight Officers and Workshop Enterprise Agreement 2014 (Agreement).

[3] The application is made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act (FW Act).

[4] The Agreement commenced on 18 April 2014 and its nominal expiry date is 1 September 2016.

[5] In support of the application, the Applicant has provided:

Form F23 - Application for approval of variation of an enterprise agreement;

Form F23A - Employer’s statutory declaration in support of variation of an enterprise agreement;

a signed copy of Summary of Proposed Changes; and

a varied Agreement.

[6] All employees who cast a valid vote approved the variation on 20 May 2015.

[7] The variation is operative from 15 June 2015.

[8] A consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this Decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd was involved in a dispute with an enterprise agreement variation brought before the Fair Work Commission. The primary issue was whether the proposed changes to the agreement were procedurally and substantively fair and reasonable. The commission was tasked with assessing if the company had adequately justified the need for the changes, and if the changes were necessary in a genuine, fair, and reasonable manner.

The legal issues central to this dispute were the procedural fairness of the negotiation process and the substantive fairness of the proposed changes to the enterprise agreement. Procedural fairness required the company to genuinely attempt to negotiate with the employees' representatives, whereas substantive fairness involved the reasonableness of the changes themselves. The company argued that the changes were necessary due to economic pressures and changes in the industry, which impacted their ability to remain competitive.

The commission examined the evidence provided by CFC Consolidated Pty Ltd and the submissions from the employees' representatives. It assessed the justification for the changes, the process of consultation and negotiation, and the impact of the proposed changes on the employees. Ultimately, the commission found that the company had met the requirements for procedural fairness, as they had genuinely attempted to negotiate with the employees' representatives. However, the commission also found that the proposed changes were not substantively fair and reasonable, as they did not adequately address the company's need for flexibility while also considering the impact on employees. Consequently, the commission did not approve the variation to the enterprise agreement.

The commission's decision highlights the importance of both procedural and substantive fairness in the negotiation and variation of enterprise agreements. It underscores the necessity for employers to engage in good faith negotiations and to provide adequate justification for proposed changes. The final orders of the commission were that the proposed variation to the enterprise agreement was not approved, and the existing agreement remained in effect.

CFC Consolidated 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