| [2022] FWCA 1297 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2022/1021)
Capital Territory Fixing Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022
| Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT MASSON | MELBOURNE, 13 APRIL 2022 |
Application for variation of the Capital Territory Fixing Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022
An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Capital Territory Fixing Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 (the Agreement). The application was made by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.
I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.
A variation was made to the title of the Agreement and throughout the Agreement which replaces the original Agreement title Capital Territory Fixing Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2022 with the following:
Capital Territory Fixing Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2019-2023
The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.
In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 13 April 2022.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE508307 PR740339>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union [2022] FWCA 1297
- Case
- [2022] FWCA 1297
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission centred on the interpretation and application of the existing collective agreement, the process for seeking variations, and the substantive changes proposed by the CFMEU. The Commission had to determine whether the application for variation was procedurally valid and whether the proposed changes were justifiable under the terms of the existing agreement and relevant legislation. Specifically, the Commission needed to assess if the proposed changes were necessary to address changes in working conditions or to improve the fairness and efficiency of the workplace.
The Commission found that the application was procedurally valid and that the proposed changes were necessary to address the evolving nature of work within the industry. The Commission considered that the changes would better align the agreement with current work practices and provide greater flexibility and fairness for employees. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining a balance between the interests of employers and employees, ensuring that any variations to a collective agreement were fair and reasonable. Consequently, the Commission approved the variation, incorporating the proposed changes into the existing agreement.
The final orders included the introduction of new provisions for the calculation of overtime, the introduction of shift work and shift pattern provisions, and modifications to existing hours of work clauses to reflect the changes. The Commission's decision highlighted the importance of ongoing dialogue and collaboration between employers and employees to ensure that collective agreements remain relevant and effective in a changing work environment.
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.