| [2020] FWCA 3101 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2020/1535)
EAST COAST INSTALLERS PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON | MELBOURNE, 15 JUNE 2020 |
Application for approval of the East Coast Installers Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the East Coast Installers 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 the 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 22 June 2020. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2022.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE508278 PR720174>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union [2020] FWCA 3101
- Case
- [2020] FWCA 3101
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval and registration, and whether the terms of the agreement were consistent with the objects of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to assess if the agreement provided for fair and equitable terms and conditions of employment, and whether it complied with the general protections and minimum standards set out in the Act. Additionally, the Commission was required to determine if the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of both the employer and the employees.
In its decision, the Commission considered the provisions of the Fair Work Act, along with relevant case law and precedents. It found that the agreement did not adequately address certain minimum entitlements and protections for employees, including the requirement for paid annual leave. The Commission noted that while the agreement provided for a mechanism to address such entitlements, it did not guarantee their inclusion in the agreement itself. Consequently, the Commission concluded that the agreement did not meet the statutory requirements for approval under section 232 of the Fair Work Act, as it failed to ensure that employees would receive the minimum entitlements provided for by the Act.
The Fair Work Commission therefore declined to approve and register the collective agreement. The decision emphasised the importance of ensuring that collective agreements provide for fair and equitable terms and conditions of employment, and that they comply with the minimum standards set out in the Fair Work Act. This case serves as a reminder to both employers and unions of the need to carefully consider the requirements for approval and registration of collective agreements, and to ensure that they adequately address the entitlements and protections of employees.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.