DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2015/2785)

ROSEVILLE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015 - 2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 10 JUNE 2015

Application for approval of the Roseville Construction Services Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2015 - 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known asthe Roseville Construction Services Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2015 - 2016 (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 Applicant). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (the Union) have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they wish to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application for approval of the Collective Agreement between Roseville Construction Services Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for the period 2015-2016. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which is tasked with resolving disputes under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute centred on the fairness and validity of the proposed collective agreement, with both parties presenting their respective arguments on various clauses and conditions within the agreement.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act, particularly in terms of ensuring it was in the best interests of the employees and did not adversely affect the employees' general rights and freedoms. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement was reasonably negotiated and whether it included appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms. Additionally, the Commission examined whether the agreement was consistent with the principles of good faith bargaining and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees.

In its decision, the Commission carefully reviewed the terms of the agreement and the submissions made by both parties. It found that while the agreement contained provisions that were generally in line with the Fair Work Act, there were certain clauses that did not adequately protect the interests of the employees or ensured their general rights and freedoms. The Commission highlighted specific provisions related to working hours, overtime, and penalty rates, which it deemed to be insufficient. Ultimately, the Commission approved the agreement with certain modifications to these clauses, ensuring that they met the required standards of fairness and reasonableness. The modifications were aimed at providing better protections for the employees and ensuring compliance with the principles of good faith bargaining.

As a result of the Commission's decision, the agreement was approved with the specified modifications. These changes were designed to ensure that the agreement complied with the Fair Work Act and provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees. The modifications included adjustments to the working hours, overtime provisions, and penalty rates to ensure they met the required standards of fairness and reasonableness. This decision underscores the importance of ensuring that collective agreements are thoroughly reviewed to protect the interests of employees and comply with statutory requirements.

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