DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4522)

CUBIC INTERIORS NSW PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 13 APRIL 2021

Application for variation of the Cubic lnteriors NSW Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Cubic lnteriors NSW 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. 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 Cubic lnteriors NSW Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 with the following:

Cubic lnteriors NSW 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 13 April 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union applied for a variation of the Cubic Interiors NSW Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022. The Union argued that the agreement was out of date and did not adequately reflect the current industrial landscape. The company contested the application, asserting that the existing agreement was still relevant and that any changes should not be made without a clear demonstration of necessity.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the existing agreement was indeed outdated and required modification. The Union contended that various economic and industrial changes necessitated an update to the terms of the agreement, while the company maintained that the current agreement was still valid and effective. The Commission had to determine if there was a sufficient basis for altering the agreement, taking into account the principles of good faith bargaining and the practical implications of any changes.

The Commission carefully considered the arguments presented by both parties and evaluated the current industrial context. It found that while the existing agreement was comprehensive, certain provisions were no longer aligned with contemporary practices and requirements. The Commission acknowledged the Union's assertion that some terms were outdated and that these changes were necessary to ensure fairness and effectiveness in the agreement. As a result, the Commission granted the application for variation, modifying specific clauses to better reflect the current industrial environment. The company was directed to implement the new terms as agreed upon by the 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