DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2018/1019)

HIGHLIGHT ALUMINIUM PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 5 APRIL 2018

Application for approval of the Highlight Aluminium Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Highlight Aluminium Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 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 12 April 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

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) filed an application for the approval of a collective agreement with Highlight Aluminium Pty Ltd, dated 2018. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions of employment stipulated in the agreement, with the CFMEU asserting that the agreement was fair and met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. Highlight Aluminium Pty Ltd contested certain provisions of the agreement, arguing that some terms were unreasonable or not in compliance with the statutory provisions governing industrial relations.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the collective agreement contained any terms that were unfair or otherwise breached the provisions of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the terms of the agreement met the criteria for being deemed unfair under section 234 of the Act, which includes considerations such as whether the terms are procedurally fair, whether they are necessary for the operation of a fair and efficient workplace, and whether they reflect the true nature of the bargaining relationship between the parties. Furthermore, the Commission needed to assess whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether it provided for a proper balance of interests between the employer and the employees.

The Fair Work Commission, after reviewing the submissions and evidence from both parties, found that the majority of the terms in the collective agreement were fair and did not contravene the Fair Work Act. The Commission considered the bargaining positions of the parties, the nature of the industry, and the context in which the agreement was made. It was determined that the agreement reflected a genuine attempt to negotiate in good faith and provided for a fair and reasonable outcome for both parties. The Commission did, however, make some minor amendments to certain terms to ensure compliance with the Act, particularly in relation to procedural fairness and the protection of employees' rights. Consequently, the application for approval was granted with the specified amendments.

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