DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/5554)

THE TORINO GROUP PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2023

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 22 JUNE 2021

Application for approval of The Torino Group Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as The Torino Group Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023 (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 29 June 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2023.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union sought approval of a collective agreement between The Torino Group Pty Ltd and itself, for the period 2019 to 2023. The dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment, particularly those relating to wages, hours of work, and other workplace matters. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission involved assessing whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, and whether it adhered to the provisions of the Act. Key points of contention included the calculation of penalty rates for various shifts and the inclusion of provisions that deviated from the Fair Work Act's minimum standards. The Commission also needed to consider the balance between the parties' bargaining power and the need to ensure that the agreement was not unduly harsh, unjust, or unreasonable.

The Commission found that while the proposed agreement generally met the statutory requirements, certain provisions regarding penalty rates were deemed to be unfair. The Commission highlighted that the agreement did not adequately reflect the industry's standard penalty rates, particularly for Sunday work. After considering submissions from both parties, the Commission made several amendments to the agreement to better align with industry standards and the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement with modifications, ensuring it complied with the necessary legal criteria.

The final orders included the approval of the collective agreement with the specified amendments to the penalty rate provisions. The Commission's decision balanced the need for fair and reasonable terms with the parties' bargaining positions, ultimately ensuring compliance with the Fair Work Act.

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