Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

[2021] FWCA 6360

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/7641)

GOAL LNTERIOR PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2023

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 20 OCTOBER 2021

Application for variation of the Goal Interior Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Goal Interior Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023 (the Agreement). The application was made by Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

[4] A variation was made to the title of the Agreement and throughout the Agreement which replaces the original Agreement title Goal Interior Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 with the following:

Goal Interior Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023

[5] The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

[6] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 20 October 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involves an application by Goal Interior Pty Ltd for a variation of the Collective Agreement with the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for the period 2019-2023. The company sought changes primarily concerning employee scheduling, overtime arrangements, and the introduction of shift work, which it argued were necessary due to evolving business needs and economic conditions. The CFMEU opposed the changes, asserting that they would negatively impact the employees' work-life balance and job security.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed variations constituted a 'good faith' negotiation under the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether they were necessary to accommodate genuine changes in the business circumstances of the employer. The Commission had to consider the balance between the employer's rights to manage its business and the employees' rights to fair treatment and protection under the collective agreement. It also needed to evaluate whether the proposed changes met the threshold for a genuine variation or if they constituted an attempt to unilaterally alter the terms of employment.

The Commission found that the employer had demonstrated a genuine need for the proposed variations, particularly in light of the economic uncertainties and changes in the business environment. However, the changes did not meet the threshold for good faith negotiations as the employer had failed to adequately consult with the union regarding the proposed changes. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining a collaborative approach in negotiations to ensure that any variations to a collective agreement are both necessary and fair. Consequently, the application for variation was dismissed, with the existing agreement remaining in force.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established