CGH Civil Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 7881

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

CGH Civil Pty Ltd
(AG2013/2931)

CGH CIVIL PTY LTD ROY HILL AWU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 10 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the CGH Civil Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the CGH Civil Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The Employer’s Declaration in Support of Application for Approval of Greenfields Agreement states that the enterprise is a genuine new enterprise that the employer is proposing to establish. It also states that the employer has not employed any of the persons who will be necessary for the normal conduct of that enterprise and will be covered by the Agreement. I am therefore satisfied that the requirements of s.172(2)(b) have been met and as a consequence the Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[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 three years and six months from the date of this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

CGH Civil Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for the approval of the Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013, which was to regulate the employment of workers on the Roy Hill iron ore project in Western Australia. The application was opposed by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), which argued that the agreement did not provide adequate protections for workers and that it undermined the collective bargaining process. The Commission was required to consider whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement provided for the fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and whether it was made in good faith. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for a single enterprise agreement to cover all workers on the project, which would simplify the bargaining process and promote consistency. However, the Commission also noted that some of the provisions in the agreement were not as favourable as those in existing enterprise agreements, and that the agreement did not provide for the same level of union representation as other agreements. The Commission considered whether these deficiencies could be justified on the basis that the agreement was necessary to facilitate the efficient and timely completion of the project.

The Commission concluded that the agreement met the criteria for approval, despite some of its deficiencies. The Commission found that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and that it was made in good faith. The Commission also found that the agreement was necessary to facilitate the efficient and timely completion of the project, and that this justified some of the less favourable provisions. The Commission approved the agreement, subject to some minor modifications to address the CFMEU's concerns.

The Commission made orders approving the Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013, subject to certain modifications. The modifications included changes to the agreement's provisions on shift patterns, overtime, and union representation. The Commission also made orders requiring CGH Civil to take certain steps to ensure that the agreement was properly communicated to workers and that any disputes arising under the agreement were resolved in a timely manner. The CFMEU's application for the agreement to be referred to the Federal Circuit Court for a further inquiry was dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established