DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/5655)

KONTRO GROUP PTY LTD T-AS URBAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS/CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 28 JUNE 2021

Application for variation of the Kontro Group Pty Ltd t-as Urban Traffic Solutions/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Kontro Group Pty Ltd t-as Urban Traffic Solutions/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 (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 Kontro Group Pty Ltd t-as Urban Traffic Solutions/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 with the following:

Kontro Group Pty Ltd t-as Urban Traffic Solutions/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 28 June 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and Urban Traffic Solutions (UTS), formerly known as Kontro Group Pty Ltd. The CFMEU sought to vary the terms of their collective agreement, specifically the Kontro Group Pty Ltd t-as Urban Traffic Solutions/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022, to address certain issues that arose post-agreement. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed changes to the collective agreement were necessary and appropriate to address the issues that had arisen since the original agreement was signed. The CFMEU argued that the changes were necessary to ensure fairness and equity for the employees, while UTS contended that the proposed changes were excessive and not justified under the circumstances.

The Fair Work Commission considered the principles of good faith bargaining and the need to balance the interests of both parties. It examined the evidence presented by both the CFMEU and UTS regarding the issues that had arisen and the proposed changes. The Commission determined that while some of the proposed changes were reasonable and necessary, others were excessive and not warranted. It concluded that the proposed changes could be varied to a limited extent, striking a balance between the interests of the employees and the employer. The Commission ordered the parties to implement the varied terms as outlined in its decision.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established