Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

[2021] FWCA 6927

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/8462)

NOFIRE PTY LTD T/AS FYREGUARD (QUEENS WHARF PROJECT) UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 1 DECEMBER 2021

Application for approval of the Nofire Pty Ltd T/As Fyreguard (Queens Wharf Project) Union Collective Agreement 2018

[1] An application has been made for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the Nofire Pty Ltd T/As Fyreguard (Queens Wharf Project) Union Collective Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act).

[2] This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of section 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 have been met. In accordance with s.187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union 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 Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union and that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 8 December 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 November 2022.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case before the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union applied for the approval of the Nofire Pty Ltd trading as Fyreguard (Queens Wharf Project) Union Collective Agreement 2018. The application for the approval of this agreement was made in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions of employment as outlined in the agreement, and whether these terms met the legal requirements for approval under the Act.

The primary legal issue the Commission had to address was whether the collective agreement provided for the protection of employees' rights and entitlements as required by the Fair Work Act. This involved scrutinising the agreement to ensure it did not undermine the protections afforded to employees, particularly in relation to minimum wages, penalty rates, leave entitlements, and other conditions of employment. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement met the standards of good faith bargaining and if it was likely to facilitate industrial harmony.

The Fair Work Commission found that the collective agreement, while generally meeting the statutory requirements, contained provisions that did not sufficiently protect the employees' rights in certain respects. The Commission noted that while the agreement addressed many aspects of employment conditions adequately, there were specific clauses that fell short of the standards set by the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the Commission made orders to modify these provisions to ensure they met the legislative requirements and better protected the employees' rights. The agreement was subsequently approved in its amended form.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission's decision highlighted the need for careful scrutiny of collective agreements to ensure they align with the statutory protections provided under the Fair Work Act. The outcome of this case serves as a reminder to all parties involved in the negotiation of such agreements to ensure that they adequately address the rights and entitlements of employees.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established