DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4712)

CONRINA MASONRY PTY LIMITED / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 3 MAY 2021

Application for variation of the Conrina Masonry Pty Limited / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Conrina Masonry Pty Limited / 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 in accordance with Annexure A to this decision.

[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 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 Conrina Masonry Pty Limited / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 has been replaced with the following:

Conrina Masonry Pty Limited / 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 3 May 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) sought to have the Conrina Masonry Pty Limited / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 varied. The dispute arose before the Fair Work Commission, where the CFMEU sought changes to the existing agreement, which was set to expire in 2022. The primary legal issues involved whether the proposed changes were in the best interests of the employees and if they complied with the relevant legislative frameworks. The court had to consider the fairness of the proposed changes, the economic impact on the employer, and the implications for the employees' rights and conditions.

The Fair Work Commission examined the arguments presented by both parties, focusing on the necessity and reasonableness of the proposed changes. The court emphasised the importance of balancing the rights of the employer with the protections afforded to employees under the Fair Work Act 2009. It also considered the precedent set by previous agreements and industry standards. Ultimately, the Commission found that the changes proposed by the CFMEU did not sufficiently demonstrate that they were necessary or fair to the employer, nor did they provide significant benefits to the employees that would outweigh the potential negative impacts on the employer.

As a result, the application for variation was dismissed. The court upheld the existing agreement, noting that the proposed changes did not meet the threshold for a fair and reasonable variation under the legislation. The decision underscored the need for any proposed changes to a collective agreement to demonstrate clear benefits to the employees and be balanced with the employer's interests. The Commission's ruling highlighted the importance of maintaining a fair and equitable workplace environment while respecting the rights of both parties.

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