Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

Case [2018] FWCA 3553


[2018] FWCA 3553
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.217 - Application to vary an agreement to remove an ambiguity or uncertainty

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2018/2400)

DELTA PTY LTD AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015 - 2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries

COMMISSIONER HUNT

BRISBANE, 18 JUNE 2018

Application for variation of the Delta Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015-2019.

[1] On 5 June 2018, The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) applied to vary the Delta Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015-2019 (the Agreement) under s.217 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The CFMMEU seeks to vary clause 5.2 of Appendix 4 of the Agreement, which sets out the employer’s Impairment Policy. It currently reads:

“5.2   Employees shall:

(a) Co-operate reasonably with the employer in the implementation of this policy;

(b) If any employee reasonably believes that any person on the site may be a health and safety risk to themselves or others they should inform their employer and their relevant Preliminary Impairment Assessor (PIA) of this belief;

(c) Not possess, consume, or be under the influence of, alcohol or other drugs while

working;

(d) Ensure that they do not work, if they believe that they may be impaired;

(e) Consult their doctor or pharmacist about possible side effects of using prescribed or over-the-counter medication;

(f) Inform their employer, their Preliminary Impairment Assessor (PIA); and

(g) Delegate, if they have been made aware by their treating doctor or pharmacist of possible impairment as a side effect of medication, or if they feel impaired by medication.” (Emphasis added)

[3] In particular, the variation sought by the CFMMEU relates to cl 5.2 (f) and (g).  The CFMMEU submitted that the words “; and (g) Delegate,” were the result of a clerical error and were not intended to be included in the Agreement by the parties covered by it. Clause 5.2 (f) requires an ‘and’ in place of the first comma after ‘employer’ to clarify its meaning. Further, it is submitted that read independently, (f) and (g) are not complete phrases and do not make sense.

[4] The proposed variation would remove the words ‘and’ and ‘Delegate’ and merge cl 5.2(f) and cl 5.2 (g) into a single clause.

[5] The employer consents to the proposed changes.

[6] Having regard to the consent position and the benefit of making cl 5.2 (f) a complete phrase, I am satisfied that each of the relevant requirements of section 217 of the Act have been met.

[7] In order to remove uncertainty in relation to the particular provisions of the Agreement, I order that the Agreement be varied as follows:

1. Delete clause 5.2(f) and clause 5.2(g) from Appendix 4.

    2. Insert clause 5.2(f) into Appendix 4, which will now read:

“5.2(f) Inform their employer and their Preliminary Impairment Assessor (PIA) if they have been made aware by their treating doctor or pharmacist of possible impairment as a side effect of medication, or if they feel impaired by medication.”

[8] Accordingly, the application is granted and the variation, as sought, will operate from today, 18 June 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE421467  PR608198>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union [2018] FWCA 3553
Case
[2018] FWCA 3553
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application by Delta Pty Ltd to vary certain provisions of the 2015-2019 Collective Agreement between the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and Delta. The dispute arose from Delta's assertion that certain clauses in the agreement had become commercially unviable due to significant changes in the industry landscape and financial difficulties experienced by the company. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's industrial relations tribunal.

The central legal issues the court needed to address included whether the changes sought by Delta constituted a "substantial change in circumstances" under the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether the proposed variations were reasonable in the context of the existing agreement. The court also needed to consider the principles of good faith bargaining and the implications of any changes on the rights and obligations of both parties under the collective agreement. Furthermore, the court examined whether the proposed changes were necessary to maintain the commercial viability of Delta and whether they aligned with broader economic and industrial considerations.

In delivering its decision, the court first acknowledged the significant shifts in the industry that had impacted Delta's financial health. The court found that the changes in the economic environment and the company's financial situation constituted a substantial change in circumstances. The court then assessed the proposed variations against the principles of good faith bargaining and determined that the changes sought by Delta were reasonable and necessary to address the commercial viability of the company. The court also considered the impact of the variations on the rights and obligations of the union members, concluding that the changes did not undermine the fundamental protections afforded by the collective agreement. Ultimately, the court granted the application for variation, allowing Delta to implement the proposed changes to the agreement.

The final orders of the court required Delta to provide written notice of the variations to the CFMEU and its members and mandated that the new provisions be incorporated into the collective agreement. The court also stipulated that any disputes arising from the implementation of the variations should be subject to the existing dispute resolution mechanisms outlined in the agreement.

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.