DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4632)

AUSTRAL SF AUSTRALIA PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 15 APRIL 2021

Application for variation of the Austral SF Australia Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Austral SF Australia Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made by the 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 Austral SF Australia Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 with the following:

Austral SF Australia 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 15 April 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application by Austral SF Australia Pty Ltd to vary a collective agreement between the company and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The crux of the dispute lay in the company's request to alter certain terms and conditions outlined in the collective agreement, which the union contested on grounds that the proposed changes were detrimental to the workforce.

The legal issues before the Commission centred on the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly sections relating to the processes for altering a registered agreement and the criteria for determining whether such changes should be approved. The Commission needed to weigh the company's right to manage its business against the rights and protections afforded to employees under the collective agreement. The central question was whether the proposed changes were reasonable and necessary in the circumstances, and if they could be justified under the statutory framework.

The Commission carefully considered the evidence and submissions from both parties. It examined the specific terms proposed for alteration, the reasons provided by the company for seeking these changes, and the union's arguments against them. Ultimately, the Commission found that the proposed changes did not meet the statutory criteria for being considered reasonable. The Commission emphasised that any variation of a collective agreement should not undermine the rights and protections already secured for the employees. Consequently, the application for variation was dismissed.

No further orders were made beyond the dismissal of the application. The collective agreement remained in its existing form, safeguarding the terms and conditions for the employees as originally negotiated.

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