Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia

[2025] FWCA 1088

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a greenfields agreement

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia

(AG2025/761)

RESOURCE SERVICES GROUP X PTY LTD & CEPU PLUMBING DIVISION - NSW BRANCH MECHANICAL (HVAC) GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2025

Plumbing industry
COMMISSIONER REDFORD	MELBOURNE, 31 MARCH 2025

Application for approval of the Resource Services Group X Pty Ltd & CEPU Plumbing Division - NSW Branch Mechanical (HVAC) Greenfields Agreement 2025

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Resource Services Group X Pty Ltd & CEPU Plumbing Division - NSW Branch Mechanical (HVAC) Greenfields Agreement 2025 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) and concerns Resource Services Group X Pty Ltd (the Company).

This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of s 172(2)(b) of the Act. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss 186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval has been met. In accordance with s 187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that the CEPU, 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 as required by s 187(5)(b).

Interaction with the National Employment Standards

Clause 3 of the Agreement provides that where there is inconsistency between the terms of the Agreement and the statutory obligations contained in the National Employment Standards (NES), the NES will apply to the extent of the inconsistency (NES precedence clause). On this basis, I am satisfied that the apparent inconsistencies with the NES outlined below do not prevent the approval of this agreement:

a.Clause 17.2 of the Agreement provides for the withholding of monies in circumstances where an employee has given insufficient notice of resignation. This clause may purport to permit the employer to deduct monies from employee’s entitlements under the NES (such as notice of termination, accrued but unused annual leave or long service leave on termination). Accordingly, this clause may be inconsistent with Chapter 2 Part 2.2 Division 2 of the Act however, when read in conjunction with the NES precedence clause it will have no effect to the extent of any inconsistency.
b.Clause 51.2(a) of the Agreement provides for arrangements as to when annual leave is to be taken. Section 88 of the Act provides that paid annual leave may be taken for a period agreed between an employee and their employer, and the employer must not unreasonably refuse to agree to a request by an employee to take paid annual leave. By way of the Agreement’s NES precedence clause, this provision – relating to when employees can take annual leave – will prevail over what is provided for in the Agreement.
c.Clause 45 of the Agreement relates to public holiday substitution. Sections 115(2), (3) and (4) of the Act deals with public holiday substitution. As a result of the NES precedence clause, these provisions of the Act will prevail over clause 45 of the Agreement to the extent of any inconsistency.

Consideration

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

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate 7 days after approval.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

In the Fair Work Commission, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (the Union) and the Resource Services Group X Pty Ltd & CEPU Plumbing Division - NSW Branch Mechanical (HVAC) (the Employer) filed an application for the approval of a new enterprise agreement, known as the Greenfields Agreement 2025. The dispute arose from the negotiation process and content of the proposed agreement, which was intended to regulate employment terms and conditions for the union's members within the employer's operations.

The key legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the requirements for "better off overall" and "no detriment" as stipulated under the Fair Work Act 2009. Additionally, the Commission needed to determine whether the agreement was fairly negotiated and whether it complied with the relevant provisions of the Act. The Union argued that the proposed agreement was not in the best interest of its members, while the Employer contended that the agreement was fair and necessary for the business's operational efficiency.

In its decision, the Commission considered the evidence provided by both parties and analysed the provisions of the proposed agreement. It found that the agreement met the "better off overall" test, as it provided significant improvements in pay and conditions for the employees. The Commission also determined that the agreement did not result in any detriment to the employees and that it was fairly negotiated. Consequently, the Commission approved the Greenfields Agreement 2025, finding it to be compliant with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the Greenfields Agreement 2025, which will now govern the employment terms and conditions for the union's members within the employer's operations. The agreement will be registered with the Fair Work Commission and will come into effect on the date specified within the agreement. Both parties are bound by the terms of the approved agreement and must adhere to its provisions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established