DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/3834)

CENTRAL SCAFFOLDS LTDST (THE TRUSTEE FOR) T/AS CENTRAL SCAFFOLDS (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) CONTRACT SCAFFOLD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	SYDNEY, 11 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the Central Scaffolds Ltdst (The Trustee for) T/as Central Scaffolds (Victorian Construction and General Division) Contract Scaffold Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Central Scaffolds Ltdst (The Trustee for) T/as Central Scaffolds (Victorian Construction and General Division) Contract Scaffold 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 11 July 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 18 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

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union sought approval of a proposed enterprise agreement between Central Scaffolds and its employees. The union argued that the agreement contained terms that were fair and reasonable, while the employer raised concerns about certain provisions, particularly those relating to wages and hours. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed agreement complied with the Act and was in the best interests of the employees. The court had to consider whether the agreement's provisions were fair and reasonable, and whether it was in the best interests of the employees. The court also needed to consider whether the agreement met the threshold criteria for approval, such as the requirements for majority support and the absence of any prohibited content.

The Fair Work Commission found that the proposed agreement was fair and reasonable and met the statutory requirements for approval. The court considered the evidence presented by both parties and found that the agreement provided for reasonable terms and conditions of employment, including provisions for wages, hours, and other employment matters. The court also found that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees, as it provided for fair and reasonable terms that were supported by a majority of the employees. The court noted that while the employer had raised concerns about certain provisions, these concerns did not outweigh the benefits of the agreement for the employees.

The Fair Work Commission approved the proposed enterprise agreement, subject to certain conditions. The court ordered that the agreement be registered and that it would come into effect on a specified date. The court also noted that any disputes arising under the agreement would be dealt with in accordance with the procedures set out in the agreement. Overall, the decision provides guidance on the factors that the court will consider when deciding whether to approve an enterprise agreement, and highlights the importance of ensuring that agreements are fair and reasonable for both employers and employees.

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