DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4499)

LIEBHERR - AUSTRALIA PTY. LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 9 APRIL 2021

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

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

Liebherr - 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 9 April 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Liebherr-Australia Pty. Ltd, sought a variation of the existing collective agreement with the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for the period 2019-2022. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over such matters under the Fair Work Act 2009. The primary dispute centred on the terms and conditions of employment, specifically regarding the application's request to alter certain provisions concerning work hours, overtime, and the classification of employees.

The legal issues before the court involved determining whether the requested changes to the collective agreement were reasonable and necessary under the statutory framework. The court needed to balance the rights and obligations of the employer and the union, considering the principles of good faith bargaining and the broader economic and social context. It was essential to assess whether the proposed changes would maintain fairness and equity for the employees while accommodating the employer's operational needs.

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the requested changes were necessary or reasonable, as required by the Fair Work Act. The court emphasised the importance of maintaining a balance between the employer's operational requirements and the rights of employees, as protected by the collective agreement. The court also highlighted the need for good faith bargaining and the preservation of the integrity of the collective bargaining process. As a result, the application for variation was dismissed. The court ordered that the existing collective agreement would remain in force, with no changes to the terms and conditions of employment as proposed by the applicant.

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