DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2015/3620)

HJW SITE WORKS PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU RIGGER / STEEL ERECTOR ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	PERTH, 25 JUNE 2015

Application for approval of the HJW Site Works Pty Ltd and the CFMEU Rigger / Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the HJW Site Works Pty Ltd and the CFMEU Rigger / Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2015 (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 and 187 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[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 is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 2 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 October 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and HJW Site Works Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was asked to determine the approval of the HJW Site Works Pty Ltd and the CFMEU Rigger / Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2015. The dispute involved the interpretation and application of various sections of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly those concerning the negotiation, content, and approval of enterprise agreements. The union argued for the agreement's approval, while the employer contested certain provisions.

The primary legal issues before the commission were whether the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval, including whether it provided for appropriate mechanisms for resolving disputes and whether it complied with the "better off overall test." The employer also challenged specific provisions related to wages, classification, and working conditions, arguing that they were not in line with industry standards or were overly restrictive. The union, on the other hand, contended that the provisions were fair and necessary to protect the rights and conditions of the employees.

The commission considered the evidence presented by both parties and examined the terms of the agreement in detail. It found that while some provisions required minor adjustments to meet the "better off overall test," the overall agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees. The commission also concluded that the dispute resolution mechanisms were adequate. After making the necessary amendments, the commission approved the enterprise agreement, finding it met the statutory requirements for registration. The employer's objections to certain provisions were overruled, and the agreement was registered as a valid enterprise agreement.

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