DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4715)

CWS CONRINA WALL SYSTEMS PTY LTD/CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

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

Application for variation of the CWS Conrina Wall Systems Pty Ltd/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the CWS Conrina Wall Systems Pty Ltd/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 CWS Conrina Wall Systems Pty Ltd/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 has been replaced with the following:

CWS Conrina Wall Systems 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 3 May 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application by Conrina Wall Systems Pty Ltd to vary the Collective Agreement made with the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for the period 2019-2022. The company sought to implement changes that would allow for increased flexibility in workforce management, including variations to shift patterns and the introduction of a new roster system. The CFMEU opposed the changes, arguing that they were not negotiated in good faith and would negatively impact employee conditions and entitlements.

The legal issues central to the dispute were whether the proposed changes were justified under the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the application process adhered to the statutory requirements for good faith negotiations. The Commission had to consider the nature and extent of the changes proposed, the impact on employees, and whether there was a valid reason for the company to deviate from the existing agreement. Additionally, the Commission examined the procedural fairness of the application process, including whether the company had genuinely attempted to negotiate with the union before resorting to the Commission.

In delivering its decision, the Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining good faith in industrial relations. It found that the proposed changes did not constitute a significant change under the Act and that the company had not demonstrated a valid reason for the proposed changes. The Commission noted that the changes were primarily driven by operational efficiencies rather than addressing a genuine issue with the current agreement. Furthermore, the Commission found procedural deficiencies in the application process, concluding that the company had not genuinely attempted to negotiate with the union before seeking a variation. As a result, the application was dismissed, and the existing collective agreement remained in force.

Consequently, the Fair Work Commission ruled against Conrina Wall Systems Pty Ltd's application to vary the Collective Agreement. The decision upheld the integrity of the collective bargaining process and reinforced the need for parties to engage in good faith negotiations. The Commission's ruling ensured that the employees' existing conditions and entitlements remained protected, and the application process was conducted in a manner consistent with the principles of procedural fairness.

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