DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2018/3019)

CHERRIE CIVIL ENGINEERING PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2017-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	SYDNEY, 17 JULY 2018

Application for approval of the Cherrie Civil Engineering Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2017-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Cherrie Civil Engineering Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2017-2018 (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 24 July 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2018.

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 a collective agreement between Cherrie Civil Engineering Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The application arose under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which mandates that certain agreements, including those concerning pay and conditions, must be approved by the Commission before they can take effect. The nature of the dispute was essentially procedural, focusing on whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Act, particularly concerning the procedures followed in its negotiation and the rights of the employees involved.

The primary legal issues before the Commission involved the procedural validity of the collective agreement. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine whether the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and whether the proper procedures were followed in its negotiation and approval. The Commission also considered whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, and whether it adequately protected the rights of the employees.

In reaching its decision, the Commission examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, focusing on the procedural aspects of the agreement's negotiation. It assessed whether the employer had engaged in good faith bargaining and whether the agreement was the product of genuine negotiations. The Commission found that the agreement had been negotiated in good faith and that the necessary procedures had been followed. Furthermore, the Commission concluded that the agreement provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees and adequately protected their rights.

Following this assessment, the Commission approved the collective agreement. The approval was subject to certain conditions, which aimed to ensure ongoing compliance with the Fair Work Act and to protect the interests of the employees. The Commission's decision was a detailed analysis of the procedural requirements and the substantive terms of the agreement, reflecting a balanced approach to ensuring that the agreement met the legal standards set by the Act.

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