DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/4498)

M GROUP CONSTRUCTION SERVICES PTY LTD T/AS M GROUP TRAFFIC CONTROL AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) TRAFFIC CONTROL ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 21 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the M Group Construction Services Pty Ltd T/As M Group Traffic Control and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Traffic Control Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the M Group Construction Services Pty Ltd T/As M Group Traffic Control and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Traffic Control 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 21 July 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 28 July 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 applicant, M Group Construction Services Pty Ltd, trading as M Group Traffic Control, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Traffic Control Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018 with the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (Victorian Construction and General Division). The union opposed the application, contending that the agreement did not comply with various provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, presided over by Commissioner J. A. Richardson.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the proposed enterprise agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the union argued that the agreement did not appropriately address certain provisions relating to employee entitlements, including minimum wage rates, penalty rates, and shift allowances. Additionally, there were concerns regarding the clarity and enforceability of certain clauses within the agreement. The court was tasked with determining whether the agreement was in compliance with the statutory framework and whether it provided adequate protections and benefits to the employees covered by the agreement.

In delivering the decision, Commissioner Richardson thoroughly examined the provisions of the agreement and the relevant legislative criteria. The Commissioner found that while the agreement contained some deficiencies, it did not fundamentally fail to meet the statutory requirements. Several of the union’s objections were addressed through minor amendments proposed by the applicant, which the Commissioner deemed acceptable. The Commissioner concluded that the agreement, as amended, provided a fair and reasonable framework for the employees, meeting the necessary standards for approval under the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the application was approved subject to the proposed amendments.

The final orders of the Commission were that the Traffic Control Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018, as amended, be approved. The agreement was to come into effect on the date of the Commission’s decision, subject to the implementation of the agreed amendments. The union’s objections were largely overcome by these modifications, ensuring that the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act.

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