DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2019/4108)

TRINITY DRAINAGE PTY LTD T/AS TRINITY DRAINAGE AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) CIVIL AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 7 NOVEMBER 2019

Application for approval of the Trinity Drainage Pty Ltd T/As Trinity Drainage and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Civil and Infrastructure Enterprise Agreement 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Trinity Drainage Pty Ltd T/As Trinity Drainage and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Civil and Infrastructure Enterprise Agreement 2019 (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 14 November 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 January 2020.

COMMISSIONER

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 an enterprise agreement between Trinity Drainage Pty Ltd, trading as Trinity Drainage, and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (Victorian Construction and General Division). The crux of the dispute was the validity and compliance of the proposed agreement with the Fair Work Act 2009. The Fair Work Commission, led by Commissioner J. R. Cox, was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary requirements for approval.

The primary legal issue the Commission had to resolve was whether the enterprise agreement complied with section 235 of the Fair Work Act, which mandates that an agreement must be "freely negotiated" and "not contain any terms that are contrary to public policy." Additionally, the Commission needed to ascertain whether the agreement adhered to the procedural requirements stipulated under section 230 of the Act, ensuring that it was properly negotiated and presented. Furthermore, the Commission had to examine whether the agreement met the standards for "no-disadvantage" under section 233 of the Act, ensuring that employees were not placed at a disadvantage compared to their position under the relevant industrial instrument.

In its decision, the Commission determined that the proposed agreement was indeed "freely negotiated" and did not contravene any public policy. The Commission found that the procedural requirements were met, and the agreement was presented in accordance with the statutory framework. It was also concluded that the agreement did not result in employees being worse off than they would be under the applicable industrial instrument. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, confirming its compliance with the legislative requirements and its alignment with the principles of fairness and free negotiation as mandated by the Fair Work Act.

The Commission's final order was the approval of the Trinity Drainage Pty Ltd T/As Trinity Drainage and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Civil and Infrastructure Enterprise Agreement 2019. This approval was contingent upon the agreement being registered with the Fair Work Commission within the specified timeframe.

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