Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

[2023] FWCA 21

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

(AG2022/5517)

WETHERILL WHITE PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2019-2023

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 4 JANUARY 2023

Application for approval of the Wetherill White Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Wetherill White Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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.

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.

The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 11 January 2023. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2023.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union sought approval of a collective agreement with Wetherill White Pty Ltd, dated 2019-2023, in the Fair Work Commission. The agreement, which covers several aspects of employment, was contested by the union on the grounds that it did not meet the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act. The central dispute hinged on whether the agreement adequately reflected the conditions necessary for a fair and effective employment relationship.

The key legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement was a bona fide agreement and whether it contained the necessary terms and conditions for a lawful collective agreement. The union argued that the agreement was comprehensive and adhered to the statutory requirements, while the respondent contended that it lacked specific provisions that were essential for a valid collective agreement. The Commission needed to determine whether the agreement was genuinely negotiated and whether it contained the necessary provisions to be considered a bona fide collective agreement.

In reaching its decision, the Commission examined the negotiation process and the contents of the agreement. It found that the agreement was genuinely negotiated and contained all the necessary terms and conditions required by the Fair Work Act. The Commission held that the agreement was comprehensive and met all statutory requirements for a collective agreement. Therefore, the application for approval was successful, and the agreement was approved as a lawful and effective collective agreement. The Commission's decision was based on the thorough examination of the negotiation process and the contents of the agreement, which demonstrated that it met all legal requirements.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established