DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/5004)

TAFKOM ENGINEERING PTY LTD AND CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	SYDNEY, 15 AUGUST 2016

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

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as Tafkom Engineering Pty Ltd and 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 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[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 was approved on 15 August 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 22 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 case before the Fair Work Commission involved an application for approval of the Tafkom Engineering Pty Ltd and CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, representing employees, sought approval of the agreement while Tafkom Engineering Pty Ltd, the employer, did not oppose the application. The union argued that the agreement provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees, while the employer did not raise any objections.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine if the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions, and whether it was free from any improper influence or interference. The Commission also had to assess if the agreement had been genuinely negotiated between the parties and if it was in the best interests of the employees.

In reaching its decision, the Commission considered the provisions of the Fair Work Act and relevant precedents. It noted that the agreement contained terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable, taking into account the nature of the industry, the bargaining power of the parties, and the economic circumstances. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement had been genuinely negotiated between the parties, as evidenced by the negotiation process and the fact that no objections were raised by the employer. Furthermore, the Commission found that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, as it provided them with a fair and reasonable set of terms and conditions.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Tafkom Engineering Pty Ltd and CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The Commission determined that the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act, as it provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions, had been genuinely negotiated, and was in the best interests of the employees. The agreement was registered on 28 November 2016.

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