DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2021/4359)

ROCK FORM GROUP PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON	MELBOURNE, 29 MARCH 2021

Application for variation of the Rock Form Group Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Rock Form Group 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 Rock Form Group Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 with the following:

Rock Form Group 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 29 March 2021.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and Rock Form Group Pty Ltd. The dispute centred around a request by the CFMEU to vary the existing Collective Agreement 2019-2022 between the parties. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The central legal issues before the court were whether the proposed variations to the Collective Agreement were justified under the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether the application met the necessary criteria for approval. The court needed to assess the procedural fairness of the application, the reasonableness of the proposed changes, and the impact of these changes on the parties involved.

In examining the application, the court considered the statutory requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. It assessed whether the application was made in good faith and whether the proposed changes were necessary to address unforeseen circumstances. The court also evaluated the potential impact of the proposed changes on the workforce, including any potential benefits or detriments. The application's compliance with procedural fairness, such as the adequacy of notice provided to the parties, was also a significant aspect of the decision-making process. The court deliberated on whether the proposed changes would maintain or improve workplace relations and whether they were in the best interests of the employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that the application met the necessary criteria for approval. The court determined that the proposed variations were reasonable and necessary, particularly in light of the exceptional circumstances affecting the industry. The changes were found to be in the best interests of the employees, as they aimed to address pressing issues and ensure fair treatment. The court also concluded that the application process was fair and that both parties had been adequately informed and consulted. Based on these findings, the court approved the variations to the Collective Agreement.

As a result of the court's decision, the Collective Agreement 2019-2022 between Rock Form Group Pty Ltd and the CFMEU was varied as per the application. The changes were implemented to address the specific issues raised and to ensure fair and equitable workplace relations. This decision underscores the importance of maintaining effective communication and cooperation between employers and unions to navigate the challenges faced in the workplace.

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