DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4627)

CITI MANAGERS PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 15 APRIL 2021

Application for variation of the Citi Managers Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Citi Managers Pty Ltd / 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 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 “Citi Managers Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022” has been replaced with the following:

Citi Managers 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.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves an application by Citi Managers Pty Ltd to vary the Collective Agreement between itself and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union for the years 2019 to 2022. The application was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which is tasked with resolving workplace disputes and overseeing the enforcement of workplace laws in Australia. The primary dispute centred on the employer's request to modify several aspects of the existing agreement, including working hours, employee classification, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed variations were justified under the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether the application met the criteria for approval as per the relevant industrial instruments. Specifically, the Commission had to determine whether the changes proposed by Citi Managers Pty Ltd were necessary to avoid financial loss, whether they were fair and reasonable, and if they adhered to the processes outlined in the existing Collective Agreement.

In its decision, the Commission examined the evidence provided by both parties and considered the broader economic context, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the financial stability of Citi Managers Pty Ltd. The Commission concluded that while the employer demonstrated a genuine need for some of the proposed changes due to financial pressures, not all of the requested variations were justified. The Commission found that certain modifications, such as changes to working hours, were necessary to prevent financial loss and were fair and reasonable. However, other changes, including those related to employee classification, did not meet the statutory criteria for approval. Consequently, the Commission approved some of the variations while rejecting others, ensuring a balanced outcome that addressed the employer's needs while protecting the rights of the employees.

The final orders of the Commission reflected its findings, approving certain variations to the Collective Agreement while rejecting others. The approved changes included adjustments to working hours to accommodate financial exigencies, while the employer's request to alter employee classifications was denied. The decision underscores the importance of a thorough assessment of both the economic context and the statutory criteria when considering applications to vary existing collective agreements.

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