DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/5006)

INTERSPAN (VIC) PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 19 AUGUST 2016

Application for approval of the Interspan (VIC) Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Interspan (VIC) Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) 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 the 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 26 August 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

The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of an enterprise agreement between Interspan (VIC) Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division). The application was made under section 232 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and the dispute concerned the terms and conditions of employment, including wages, hours of work, and other matters of significance to employees in the relevant industry. The Fair Work Commission, presided over by Commissioner McCabe, was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements of the Act and was in the best interests of the employees.

The legal issues the court had to decide included whether the agreement was a genuine enterprise agreement, whether it provided for the proper protection of employees' rights, and whether it met the requirements for simplicity, clarity, and accessibility. The CFMEU argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while Interspan (VIC) Pty Ltd contended that certain provisions were not in the best interests of the employees. The court had to carefully examine the terms of the agreement and consider the evidence presented by both parties to determine if the agreement was appropriate for approval.

The court found that the agreement was a genuine enterprise agreement and that it provided for the proper protection of employees' rights. The court concluded that the agreement met the requirements for simplicity, clarity, and accessibility and that it was in the best interests of the employees. The court noted that the agreement contained provisions for wages, hours of work, and other matters of significance, and that it provided for appropriate mechanisms for dispute resolution. The court was satisfied that the agreement was fair and reasonable and approved it under section 233 of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The final orders of the court were that the Interspan (VIC) Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018 be approved as a registered agreement under section 178 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The agreement was to be registered by the Fair Work Commission and would be in effect from 1 July 2016 until 30 June 2018, or until terminated earlier in accordance with the agreement or the Act. The court's decision provides clarity on the requirements for enterprise agreements and the role of the Fair Work Commission in approving such agreements.

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