Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

[2021] FWCA 5675

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/7011)

THE TRUSTEE FOR SARTOR FAMILY TRUST T/AS SARTOR BRISBANE CONCRETE SERVICES AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2020-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 14 SEPTEMBER 2021

Application for approval of The Trustee for Sartor Family Trust T/As Sartor Brisbane Concrete Services and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2020-2022

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as The Trustee for Sartor Family Trust T/As Sartor Brisbane Concrete Services and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2020-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 21 September 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2022.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union for approval of a collective agreement between The Trustee for Sartor Family Trust trading as Sartor Brisbane Concrete Services and the CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2020-2022. The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly those concerning the negotiation and registration of such agreements. The Commission had to determine if the agreement was made in good faith and whether it contained the necessary terms as required by law.

The legal issues before the Commission encompassed several critical elements. Primarily, the Commission needed to assess if the collective agreement was genuinely negotiated between the parties and if it adhered to the statutory requirements for registration. This involved scrutinising the bargaining process, the content of the agreement, and the manner in which it was executed. Additionally, the Commission had to consider if the agreement complied with the provisions concerning employee protections and the rights of employees to be free from discrimination and unfair treatment.

In delivering its decision, the Commission carefully examined the evidence presented regarding the negotiation process and the content of the agreement. The Commission found that the agreement was indeed negotiated in good faith and contained all the necessary terms as stipulated by the Fair Work Act. The evidence supported that the bargaining process was fair and that the agreement was not only comprehensive but also compliant with the statutory requirements. Consequently, the Commission approved the collective agreement, recognising its validity and applicability for the specified period. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to the legislative framework when negotiating and registering collective agreements to ensure fairness and compliance with the law.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established