Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union Summary

[2018] FWCA 1053

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

decision

Fair Work Act 2009

s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

(AG2018/280)

J & S Ironworkers Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
Commissioner Gregory	MELBOURNE, 16 FEBRUARY 2018

Application for approval of the J & S Ironworkers Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2018.

An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the J & S Ironworkers Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Rigger/Steel Erector 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.

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, 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 23 February 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 Fair Work Commission involved an application for approval of an enterprise agreement between J & S Ironworkers Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (Victorian Construction and General Division). The agreement in question was the Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009, including compliance with the "better off overall test" and ensuring the agreement did not undermine the safety, health, or welfare of employees.

The central legal issue revolved around whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the statutory requirements and protections set forth in the Fair Work Act. This involved examining whether the agreement satisfied the better off overall test, which requires that employees be no worse off financially and, in some cases, better off overall compared to the applicable award or safety net. Additionally, the Commission had to ensure that the agreement did not adversely affect the safety, health, or welfare of employees, and that it was fairly negotiated and did not contain any terms that were contrary to public policy or unfair.

In deliberating on the matter, the Commission assessed the economic and non-economic provisions of the agreement. It considered the financial implications for employees, including wages, conditions, and other benefits, against the relevant award. The Commission also examined the agreement's provisions concerning safety, health, and welfare to ensure they did not compromise employee protections. After careful consideration, the Commission concluded that the agreement met all necessary statutory criteria and did not contravene any public policy or unfair terms. Consequently, the application for approval was granted, and the Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018 was approved.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018, effective from the date of the decision. This decision not only recognised the agreement as meeting all legislative requirements but also ensured that the terms negotiated between the parties provided a fair and balanced outcome for the employees covered by the agreement.

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established