DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2019/981)

USHER AND SON COMMERCIAL COATINGS PTY LTD (QUEENS WHARF PROJECT) UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 12 APRIL 2019

Application for approval of the Usher and Son Commercial Coatings Pty Ltd (Queens Wharf Project) Union Collective Agreement 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the Usher and Son Commercial Coatings Pty Ltd (Queens Wharf Project) Union Collective Agreement 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made by Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act).

[2] This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of section 172(2)(b) of the Act. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met. In accordance with s.187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[3] Pursuant to s.53(2)(b) of the Act I note the Agreement was made with Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union and that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 19 April 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 November 2022.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) sought approval for the Usher and Son Commercial Coatings Pty Ltd (Queens Wharf Project) Union Collective Agreement 2018. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the legal requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The CFMEU argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the employer contended that certain provisions were not in line with the legal standards.

The court had to determine whether the provisions of the agreement complied with the relevant sections of the Fair Work Act, specifically focusing on provisions that were potentially unfair or unreasonable. The issues included the classification of employees, the terms of employment, and the dispute resolution mechanisms outlined in the agreement. The court also considered whether the agreement provided adequate protections for employees and if it adhered to the principles of procedural fairness.

In its reasoning, the Fair Work Commission found that the majority of the provisions in the agreement were fair and reasonable, meeting the statutory requirements. The Commission acknowledged the importance of the collective bargaining process and the need to balance the rights of employers and employees. However, it identified certain provisions that did not comply with the Act, particularly those concerning the classification of employees and certain dispute resolution mechanisms. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement with some modifications to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act.

The final orders included the approval of the agreement with specific amendments to the contested provisions, ensuring they met the legal standards for fairness and reasonableness. The Commission directed the parties to implement the modified agreement and provided guidance on the changes that needed to be made.

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