DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/4439)

ABLE INDUSTRIAL FLOORS PTY LTD AND CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 18 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the Able Industrial Floors Pty Ltd and CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Able Industrial Floors Pty Ltd and CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019 (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 18 July 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 25 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 case involved the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Able Industrial Floors Pty Ltd, with the dispute centering around the approval of an enterprise agreement for the period 2016-2019. The Fair Work Commission was the court in this instance, tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Union and the company had reached an agreement on various terms and conditions of employment, and this was subject to the Commission’s scrutiny to ensure compliance with legal standards.

The central legal issues revolved around whether the agreement was genuinely a product of bargaining between the parties, whether it met the 'better off overall test', and if it adhered to the provisions of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission had to assess if the agreement provided employees with at least the minimum rates of pay and conditions, and whether it was made in good faith and without coercion. Additionally, the Commission examined whether the agreement complied with the 'no disbenefit test', which ensures that employees are not worse off financially under the new agreement.

In its reasoning, the Commission found that the agreement was genuinely a product of bargaining, as evidenced by the negotiation process between the parties. It also determined that the agreement met the 'better off overall test', as employees would not be worse off under the new terms. Furthermore, the agreement was found to comply with all statutory minimum entitlements, and the 'no disbenefit test' was satisfied. The Commission concluded that the agreement was fair and reasonable, and thus approved it.

The Fair Work Commission granted approval for the enterprise agreement, setting forth terms and conditions that would govern the employment relationship between the parties for the specified period. The decision underscored the importance of genuine bargaining, the protection of employee rights, and the adherence to statutory standards in enterprise 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