DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2020/1134)

PROJECT SERVICE HOLDINGS PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2022

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 1 MAY 2020

Application for approval of the Project Service Holdings Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Project Service Holdings 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 8 May 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 under consideration was an application for the approval of a collective agreement between Project Service Holdings Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for the period 2019-2022. The application was lodged in the Fair Work Commission, where the parties sought to resolve disputes regarding the terms and conditions of employment as outlined in the proposed agreement. The CFMEU, representing the employees, argued that the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, while Project Service Holdings Pty Ltd contended that certain provisions were overly restrictive and detrimental to the business operations.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed collective agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically if it contained terms that were unfair or unreasonable. Key points of contention included the duration of the agreement, the provisions concerning overtime, shift patterns, and the definition of "rostered day off." The Commission had to evaluate if these terms were necessary and appropriate for the specific circumstances of the workplace and if they adequately balanced the interests of both employers and employees.

The Fair Work Commission carefully examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the broader context of the industry. The Commission found that the proposed agreement, while containing some restrictive provisions, was not unfair or unreasonable overall. The Commission noted the necessity for certain terms to ensure the safety and welfare of employees in the industry. It concluded that the benefits of the agreement, including provisions for paid leave and penalties for breaches, outweighed the potential drawbacks. Consequently, the Commission approved the collective agreement, recognising its role in providing fair terms for the employees while also considering the operational needs of the employer.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the Project Service Holdings Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the decision. The agreement was to come into effect from the date of the Commission’s decision and remain in force for the specified period. The decision underscored the importance of achieving a balance between the rights of employers and employees within the framework of fair work legislation.

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