DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/560)

VALUE SHOPFITTING & CABINETMAKING PTY. LIMITED AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2014-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER ROE	MELBOURNE, 30 MARCH 2016

Application for approval of the Value Shopfitting & Cabinetmaking Pty. Limited and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2014-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Value Shopfitting & Cabinetmaking Pty. Limited and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2014-2018 (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 (CFMEU). 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 CFMEU 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 30 March 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 6 April 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and Value Shopfitting & Cabinetmaking Pty. Limited. The matter was before the Fair Work Commission, where the union sought approval for a collective agreement between the parties covering the period 2014 to 2018. The crux of the dispute lay in the interpretation and compliance of the agreement with the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly concerning provisions related to wages, conditions, and dispute resolution mechanisms.

The legal issues the court needed to address included whether the collective agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act, and if it provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for employees. Specifically, the court had to examine the fairness of wage provisions, the reasonableness of the conditions, and the adequacy of the dispute resolution mechanisms outlined in the agreement. The union argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the employer raised concerns about certain provisions.

The Fair Work Commission found that while the majority of the agreement was in compliance with the Fair Work Act, there were specific clauses that did not meet the statutory requirements. The court highlighted that some wage provisions and conditions were not sufficiently fair and reasonable, and the dispute resolution mechanisms were inadequate. Consequently, the court did not grant approval for the entire agreement, but instead made specific orders to amend certain provisions to ensure they complied with the Act. These amendments were aimed at achieving a balance between the interests of the union and the employer while ensuring the fairness and reasonableness of the terms for 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