DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd
(AG2019/1762)

CMR CIVIL WORKFORCE PTY LTD & THE AUSTRALIAN WORKERS’ UNION AGREEMENT 2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 12 JUNE 2019

The CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd & The Australian Workers’ Union Agreement 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd & The Australian Workers’ Union Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). It has been made by CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In particular, I am satisfied that The Australian Workers’ Union (the AWU) is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[3] Pursuant to s.53(2)(b) of the Act I note the Agreement was made with the AWU and that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 June 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 February 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd, an employer, and the Australian Workers' Union, a trade union. The dispute centred around the interpretation and application of a registered agreement, specifically the CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd & The Australian Workers' Union Agreement 2019. The union sought to enforce certain provisions of the agreement, which the employer contested on grounds of ambiguity and non-compliance with legislative requirements.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether certain clauses within the agreement were ambiguous and, if so, how those ambiguities should be resolved. Additionally, the Commission had to determine whether the agreement complied with the statutory framework set out in the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly concerning the procedural fairness and good faith obligations of the parties. The union argued that the employer had breached the agreement by not adhering to the specified terms, while the employer contended that the agreement was ambiguous and, thus, unenforceable.

The Fair Work Commission found that several clauses in the agreement were indeed ambiguous, leading to a need for interpretation. The Commission applied the principle of contra proferentem, interpreting the ambiguous terms against the drafter, in this case, the employer. The Commission also determined that the employer had not acted in good faith and had breached the procedural obligations outlined in the agreement. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the union, enforcing the contested provisions of the agreement against the employer. The Commission further ordered the employer to remedy its breaches and to comply with the agreement going forward.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission held that the employer, CMR Civil Workforce Pty Ltd, had violated the terms of the registered agreement and ordered specific remedies to address the breaches. The Commission's decision underscored the importance of clarity in union agreements and the necessity for both parties to adhere to their obligations in good faith.

CMR Civil Workforce 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