DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/3809)

STILCON SCAFFOLDING PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) CONTRACT SCAFFOLD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 8 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (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 Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (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 8 July 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 15 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, acting on behalf of Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd employees, lodged an application seeking approval of the Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Contract Scaffold Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The application was opposed by the respondents who raised issues concerning the fairness of the agreement, particularly in relation to the terms and conditions outlined within. The dispute centred on the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009, focusing on whether the agreement met the statutory requirements for approval.

The primary legal issues revolved around the fairness test stipulated under section 233 of the Fair Work Act, which requires that an enterprise agreement be fair and not prejudicial to the operation of the enterprise. The opposition contended that certain provisions of the agreement were not fair, as they did not adequately protect the employees' interests and potentially disadvantaged them. The court was required to assess whether the agreement complied with the statutory criteria and whether any terms were unfair.

The Fair Work Commission examined the arguments presented by both parties and deliberated on the fairness of the agreement. It considered the broader context of the industry and the specific circumstances of Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd. After careful consideration, the Commission found that the agreement was fair and met the statutory requirements for approval. The Commission concluded that the terms of the agreement were reasonable and did not unjustifiably prejudice the interests of the employees. The opposition's concerns were addressed and found to be unfounded upon thorough examination.

The Commission approved the Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Contract Scaffold Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. This decision was made on the basis that the agreement was fair, complied with the Fair Work Act, and did not unjustifiably disadvantage the employees. The approval was effective from the date of the decision, allowing the agreement to govern the employment conditions of the Stilcon Scaffolding Pty Ltd employees for the specified period.

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