Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

Case [2018] FWCA 3555


[2018] FWCA 3555
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
(AG2018/2407)

ROSENLUND CONTRACTORS PTY LTD AND CFMMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2018-2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries

COMMISSIONER HUNT

BRISBANE, 18 JUNE 2018

Application for variation of the Rosenlund Contractors Pty Ltd and CFMMEU Union Collective Agreement 2018-2019.

[1] On 5 June 2018, The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU) applied to vary the Rosenlund Contractors Pty Ltd and CFMMEU Union Collective Agreement 2018-2019 (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

<AE428626  PR608200>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union [2018] FWCA 3555
Case
[2018] FWCA 3555
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved Rosenlund Contractors Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMMEU). The dispute centred around an application to vary the existing collective agreement that governed the employment terms between Rosenlund Contractors and the union for the years 2018 to 2019. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over employment-related disputes and collective agreements in Australia.

The legal issues before the Commission involved whether the proposed changes to the collective agreement were reasonable and necessary, and whether they were consistent with the principles of good faith bargaining and the broader objectives of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was required to assess the merits of the application, the impact of the proposed changes on the employees and the employer, and whether the changes would promote harmonious, productive and cooperative workplace relationships.

The Commission found that the proposed changes to the collective agreement were necessary to accommodate changes in the business environment and to ensure the continued viability of Rosenlund Contractors. The changes included adjustments to work hours, wage rates, and certain working conditions, which the employer argued were necessary to remain competitive and sustainable. The Commission also considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the impact of the proposed changes on employees and the broader workforce. Ultimately, the Commission determined that the changes were reasonable and in line with the principles of good faith bargaining and the objectives of the Fair Work Act. The Commission granted the application to vary the collective agreement, allowing the changes to proceed.

As a result of the decision, the collective agreement between Rosenlund Contractors and the CFMMEU was varied to reflect the changes proposed by the employer. The new terms and conditions of employment, as outlined in the varied agreement, would now govern the relationship between the parties for the duration of the agreement. The decision serves as a reminder of the importance of good faith bargaining and the role of the Commission in facilitating fair and reasonable outcomes in employment-related disputes.

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.