Codmah Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 1024

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Codmah Pty Ltd
(AG2013/69)

CODMAH PTY. LTD. EMPLOYEE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2013 - 2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER BULL	SYDNEY, 13 FEBRUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Codmah Pty. Ltd. Employee Collective Agreement 2013 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Codmah Pty. Ltd. Employee Collective Agreement 2013 - 2017 (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] The Commission held a conference via telephone with the Applicant on 12 February 2013 to address the Commission’s concerns it had previously raised in correspondence with respect to clause 14 - Individual flexibility arrangement (IFA), and in particular, subclause 14.2 of the Agreement. The Applicant advised and agreed that many of the items in subclause 14.2 of the Agreement are not required as they do not vary a term of the Agreement.

[3] The Agreement covers employees engaged in the classification structure at Schedule A of the Agreement. I am satisfied that pursuant to s.186(3A) of the Act, this group is fairly chosen as being operationally or organisationally distinct.

[4] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to the application for approval have been met.

[5] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) of the Act, the Agreement will operate from 20 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is four years from the date of operation.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Codmah Pty Ltd sought approval for the Employee Collective Agreement 2013-2017. The agreement was between the company and the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, representing the employees. The primary dispute centred around the procedural fairness of the negotiation process and the agreement's compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was required to determine whether the process and the agreement adhered to the statutory requirements.

The court examined the evidence presented by the parties regarding the negotiation process, including whether the union was given a fair opportunity to participate and whether the company engaged in good faith bargaining. The court also considered whether the agreement met the minimum conditions set out in the Fair Work Act, including provisions for minimum wages, conditions, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The court further assessed whether the agreement was consistent with the principles of contemporary industrial relations and fair work.

After reviewing the evidence and arguments, the Commission found that the negotiation process was generally fair and that the agreement was in compliance with the statutory requirements. The Commission acknowledged the union's concerns about certain aspects of the negotiation process but concluded that they did not significantly impact the overall fairness of the process. The court also found that the agreement contained provisions that met the minimum conditions and were consistent with contemporary industrial relations principles. Consequently, the Commission approved the Employee Collective Agreement 2013-2017.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Employee Collective Agreement 2013-2017, subject to certain conditions. The conditions included monitoring the agreement's implementation and addressing any issues that may arise during its operation. The Commission also required the parties to provide regular reports on the agreement's progress and to engage in ongoing discussions to ensure its effective implementation. The court's decision provided clarity for the parties and established a framework for the agreement's operation.

Codmah Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established