DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2018/1113)

FIRE8 PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	CANBERRA, 16 APRIL 2018

Application for approval of the Fire8 Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Fire8 Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018 (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 23 April 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application for the approval of an enterprise agreement between Fire8 Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (Victorian Construction and General Division) for the period 2016 to 2018. The application was brought before the Fair Work Commission, which was tasked with determining whether the agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The primary focus of the dispute was on the provisions of the agreement that related to the classification of employees, their working conditions, and the resolution of disputes.

The legal issues that the Commission needed to address included whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated between the parties, whether it contained the minimum terms and conditions required by law, and whether it adhered to the principles of procedural fairness. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether any terms in the agreement were discriminatory or otherwise contrary to public policy. The core of the dispute centred around the classification of certain employees, the conditions governing shift patterns, and the mechanisms for resolving workplace disputes.

In reaching its decision, the Commission carefully examined the evidence and submissions provided by both parties. The Commission determined that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated and contained the minimum terms and conditions as required by the Act. It found that the provisions regarding employee classification and shift patterns were fair and did not contravene any legal principles. Furthermore, the Commission concluded that the dispute resolution mechanisms were reasonable and appropriate. As a result, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, finding that it met the necessary statutory requirements and was in the best interests of the employees and the employer. The decision was made in accordance with the principles of fairness and good faith, ensuring that the agreement was beneficial for both parties involved.

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