DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/5218)

COURTLY REO PTY LIMITED / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 31 MAY 2021

Application for variation of the Courtly Reo Pty Limited / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

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

[2] The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement in accordance with Annexure A to this decision.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the FW Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met including, without limitation, that the Agreement as varied continues to pass the better off overall test.

[4] A variation was made to the title of the Agreement with the consequence that, throughout the Agreement, the original Agreement title “Courtly Reo Pty Limited / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022” has been replaced with the following:

Courtly REO 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 31 May 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved an application by the employer, Courtly Reo Pty Limited, to vary the existing Collective Agreement with the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The dispute centred on the employer's request to amend certain clauses within the agreement, including those relating to working hours, overtime, and the introduction of new technology in the workplace. The application was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the proposed changes were reasonable and in line with the principles of good faith bargaining.

The primary legal issues before the Commission involved whether the proposed changes to the Collective Agreement were justifiable and whether they adhered to the principles of good faith bargaining. The Commission needed to assess whether the employer had demonstrated that the changes were necessary and reasonable, and whether the employer had engaged in genuine negotiations with the union. Furthermore, the Commission was required to consider the potential impact of the proposed changes on the employees and whether any detriment caused to them was outweighed by the benefits to the employer.

In delivering its decision, the Fair Work Commission carefully examined the evidence and submissions from both parties. The Commission found that the employer had not sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed changes were necessary or reasonable. Additionally, the Commission noted that the employer had not engaged in genuine negotiations with the union, thereby breaching the principles of good faith bargaining. Consequently, the application for variation of the Collective Agreement was dismissed. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining a collaborative and constructive relationship between employers and unions, and highlighted the need for both parties to engage in meaningful negotiations to reach a fair and balanced outcome.

The final orders of the Fair Work Commission included the dismissal of the employer's application for variation of the Collective Agreement. The existing terms and conditions, as outlined in the 2019-2022 agreement, remained in effect. The Commission also emphasised the importance of the parties continuing to engage in good faith bargaining to address any future issues or changes in the workplace.

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