DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/1118)

THE TRUSTEE FOR HAMILTON AND WALKER FAMILY TRUST T/A ACE HIGH INSTALLATIONS AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015-2019 (THE AGREEMENT)

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 16 MAY 2016

Application for approval of The Trustee for Hamilton and Walker Family Trust T/A Ace High Installations and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015-2019).

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as The Trustee for Hamilton and Walker Family Trust T/A Ace High Installations and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015-2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the 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 16 May 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 23 May 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 2 July 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter involved an application for the approval of a collective agreement between The Trustee for Hamilton and Walker Family Trust, trading as Ace High Installations, and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with assessing whether the agreement met the legal requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission needed to ensure that the agreement was fair and reasonable, did not undermine the Act's objects, and provided for appropriate processes for the resolution of disputes.

The key legal issue before the Commission was whether the collective agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the objects of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission examined whether certain provisions in the agreement were inconsistent with the Act's emphasis on maintaining a productive and harmonious workplace. The agreement's provisions on penalty rates, shift patterns, and dispute resolution mechanisms were under scrutiny. The Commission also considered whether the agreement adequately provided for the resolution of disputes in a fair and efficient manner.

The Fair Work Commission found that the collective agreement was largely compliant with the Act's requirements. The provisions concerning penalty rates and shift patterns were deemed reasonable and appropriate for the industry. The Commission noted that the agreement contained mechanisms for the resolution of disputes, which were consistent with the Act's objectives. The Commission concluded that the agreement did not undermine the objects of the Act and was fair and reasonable in its terms. As a result, the Commission approved the agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the collective agreement between The Trustee for Hamilton and Walker Family Trust, trading as Ace High Installations, and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, effective from the specified period. The Commission's approval was based on its finding that the agreement met the legal requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 and did not contain provisions that were inconsistent with the Act's objects. The agreement was considered fair and reasonable, and it provided for appropriate processes for the resolution of disputes.

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