DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2020/1452)

SAFE AND SOUND SCAFFOLDING AND CFMEU (WA) (ELIZABETH QUAY AND CAPITAL SQUARE) GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS	PERTH, 24 JUNE 2020

Application for variation of the Safe and Sound Scaffolding and CFMEU (WA) (Elizabeth Quay and Capital Square) Greenfields Agreement 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation of the Safe and Sound Scaffolding and CFMEU (WA) (Elizabeth Quay and Capital Square) Greenfields Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. A list of proposed changes is attached to this decision as Attachment A.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The application is approved and the Agreement is now known as the Safe and Sound Scaffolding Pty Ltd and CFMEU (WA) (1 The Esplanade Project, Elizabeth Quay and Capital Square) Greenfields Agreement 2019. A consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied under s.210 of the Act, is attached to this decision.

[4] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation made pursuant to s.210 of the Act operates from the date of this decision.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ATTACHMENT A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application for the variation of the Safe and Sound Scaffolding and CFMEU (WA) (Elizabeth Quay and Capital Square) Greenfields Agreement 2019. The applicant, Safe and Sound Scaffolding, sought to amend the agreement to reduce the number of workers required on certain projects, while the respondent, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (WA), opposed the variation. The court was tasked with determining whether the proposed changes to the agreement were reasonable and necessary to facilitate Safe and Sound Scaffolding's business operations.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the proposed changes to the Greenfields Agreement were justified and in line with the principles of fairness and reasonableness. The court had to consider the potential impact of the changes on the employees' conditions of employment and whether the applicant had demonstrated that the changes were necessary for its business operations. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the proposed changes were consistent with the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 (WA).

In its decision, the court carefully examined the evidence and submissions presented by both parties. The court concluded that the proposed changes to the Greenfields Agreement were reasonable and necessary for Safe and Sound Scaffolding's business operations. The court found that the applicant had demonstrated that the changes were essential to ensure the financial viability of the company and to maintain its ability to compete in the market. Furthermore, the court determined that the changes did not undermine the fundamental conditions of employment for the affected employees and were consistent with the principles of fairness and reasonableness. As a result, the court granted the application for the variation of the Greenfields Agreement.

The court ordered that the Greenfields Agreement be varied as per the terms outlined in Safe and Sound Scaffolding's application, effective from the date of the court's decision. The amended agreement would now reflect the reduced number of workers required on the specified projects, while still maintaining the core conditions of employment for the employees. The decision ensured that Safe and Sound Scaffolding could continue its business operations with the necessary workforce adjustments, while also upholding the rights and interests of the employees involved.

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