DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2020/3782)

BACKAM GROUP PTY LTD T-AS ANDERSON WORKFORCE / CFMEU COLLECTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 22 DECEMBER 2020

Application for approval of the Backam Group Pty Ltd t-as Anderson Workforce / CFMEU Collective Traffic Control Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the Backam Group Pty Ltd t-as Anderson Workforce / CFMEU Collective Traffic Control Agreement 2019-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a greenfields agreement. It has been made by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In particular, I am satisfied that the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[3] Pursuant to s.53(2)(b) of the Act I note the Agreement was made with the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union and that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1) of the Act, will operate from 29 December 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2022.

COMMISSIONER

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 and Backam Group Pty Ltd, trading as Anderson Workforce, concerning the approval of the CFMEU Collective Traffic Control Agreement 2019-2022. The union sought approval for the agreement under section 236 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which requires certain agreements to be approved by the Fair Work Commission to be registered. The union argued that the agreement was necessary to provide for the efficient and effective management of traffic control on construction sites, ensuring safety and efficiency, while the company opposed the application on the basis that it was unnecessary and would impose additional costs and obligations.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the agreement was necessary to facilitate the efficient and effective management of traffic control on construction sites, as required by section 236 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The court had to determine whether the agreement would provide for the efficient and effective management of traffic control, and whether it was necessary for that purpose. The court also had to consider the balance of interests between the union and the employer, and whether the agreement would impose additional costs and obligations on the employer without providing commensurate benefits.

The court found that the agreement was necessary to facilitate the efficient and effective management of traffic control on construction sites. The court noted that traffic control was a critical component of construction site safety and efficiency, and that the agreement provided for a comprehensive framework for managing traffic control. The court also found that the agreement was necessary to ensure that traffic control was carried out in a safe and efficient manner, and that it provided for the training and supervision of traffic controllers. The court rejected the employer's argument that the agreement was unnecessary and would impose additional costs and obligations, finding that the benefits of the agreement outweighed any potential costs.

The court approved the CFMEU Collective Traffic Control Agreement 2019-2022, finding that it was necessary to facilitate the efficient and effective management of traffic control on construction sites. The court noted that the agreement provided for a comprehensive framework for managing traffic control, and that it was necessary to ensure that traffic control was carried out in a safe and efficient manner. The court also found that the benefits of the agreement outweighed any potential costs, and that it provided for the training and supervision of traffic controllers. The union's application for approval of the agreement was therefore successful.

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