DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/5241)

GJ REID BRICKLAYING PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) BRICK LAYING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 -2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 30 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the GJ Reid Bricklaying Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Brick Laying Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the GJ Reid Bricklaying Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Brick Laying 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, 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, 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 6 September 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union applied for approval of the GJ Reid Bricklaying Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Brick Laying Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. GJ Reid Bricklaying Pty Ltd opposed the application on the basis that the agreement did not meet the "better off overall test" (BOOT). The dispute centred on whether the proposed agreement provided employees with adequate protections and benefits compared to the applicable award or safety net.

The legal issues before the Commission involved determining whether the proposed agreement provided employees with conditions that were no less favourable than those provided by the relevant award or safety net. The Commission had to consider the overall effect of the agreement on employees, including its impact on wages, hours, leave entitlements, and other conditions of employment. Additionally, the Commission had to assess whether the agreement included appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms and whether it complied with the relevant legislative framework.

The Commission found that the proposed agreement did not meet the BOOT. The Commission identified several areas of concern, including the level of wages and the provisions regarding overtime and penalty rates. The Commission concluded that the agreement did not provide employees with adequate protections and benefits compared to the applicable award or safety net. As a result, the application for approval was dismissed.

The Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide employees with fair and reasonable conditions of employment. The Commission noted that the BOOT is a fundamental principle of the Fair Work Act, designed to protect employees from being worse off as a result of an enterprise agreement. The Commission also highlighted the need for enterprise agreements to include appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms to ensure that any issues that arise can be resolved effectively and efficiently.

Construction, Forestry, 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