Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

[2021] FWCA 6092

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/7479)

PGA RENDERING (AUST) PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN	MELBOURNE, 1 OCTOBER 2021

Application for variation of the PGA Rendering (Aust) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the PGA Rendering (Aust) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union pursuant to s 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application introduces various changes to the Agreement. The variation 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 has been met.

[4] I note that the variation changed the title of the Agreement with the consequence that, throughout the Agreement, the original Agreement title ‘PGA Rendering (Aust) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022’ now appears as ‘PGA Rendering (Aust) 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 1 October 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application by PGA Rendering (Aust) Pty Ltd for a variation of the collective agreement with the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for the period 2019 to 2022. The central issue in the dispute was whether the proposed changes to the agreement, which included modifications to wage rates, working hours, and shift patterns, were necessary to ensure the company's financial viability and competitiveness in a challenging economic environment.

The legal issues the commission needed to address were whether the company had demonstrated a genuine need for the proposed changes, whether the changes were reasonable in the circumstances, and whether the application process had been conducted fairly. The commission had to consider the company's financial evidence, the impact of the proposed changes on employees, and the union's objections to the changes. The commission also had to ensure that the application process was conducted in accordance with the Fair Work Act 2009.

After hearing evidence from both parties and reviewing the submissions, the commission found that the company had demonstrated a genuine need for the proposed changes, and that the changes were reasonable in the circumstances. The commission noted that the company had faced significant financial difficulties, and that the proposed changes were necessary to ensure its long-term viability. The commission also found that the application process had been conducted fairly, and that the company had engaged in good faith negotiations with the union. The commission therefore granted the application for variation of the collective agreement, subject to certain conditions designed to protect the interests of employees. These conditions included a requirement that the company provide employees with appropriate notice of any changes to their working conditions, and a requirement that the company consult with the union before making any further changes to the agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established