DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2020/2570)

BRIGHT WHITE PAINTING & DECORATING PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 9 SEPTEMBER 2020

Application for approval of the Bright White Painting & Decorating Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Bright White Painting & Decorating Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[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.

[3] The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 16 September 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2022.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved an application for the approval of a collective agreement between Bright White Painting & Decorating Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union for the period 2019-2022. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically sections concerning the authorisation and approval of enterprise agreements. The case centred on the validity of the agreement's provisions, including those related to wages, working hours, and other employment conditions.

The primary legal issues revolved around whether the collective agreement was an "enterprise agreement" as defined by the Act, and if it had been made in accordance with the relevant provisions. The Commission examined the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it complied with the mandatory requirements for a "bargaining representative" and "good faith" bargaining. Additionally, the court considered whether the agreement satisfied the "better off overall test" which mandates that the terms of an enterprise agreement must not be less favourable to employees than the applicable award or registered agreement.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement was valid and met all statutory requirements. The Commission determined that the negotiation process adhered to the Act's provisions, with the union acting as a bargaining representative and engaging in good faith bargaining. Furthermore, the Commission concluded that the agreement was better off overall for the employees, as it provided for wages and conditions that were at least as favourable as those in the applicable award. Consequently, the Commission approved the collective agreement, affirming its compliance with the necessary legal standards.

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