DECISION

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

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2015/583)

EVS GROUP AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (TRAFFIC) / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015 - 2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE	SYDNEY, 30 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the EVS Group Australia Pty Ltd (Traffic) / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2015 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the EVS Group Australia Pty Ltd (Traffic) / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2015 - 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[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. As required by s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with s.54(1) it will operate from 6 April 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and EVS Group Australia Pty Ltd (EVS) brought a joint application before the Fair Work Commission for approval of a collective agreement between the parties. The agreement, which was entered into on 1 July 2015, covered employees of EVS who are members of the CFMEU. The application for approval was made under section 233 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The CFMEU and EVS argued that the agreement was a good faith bargaining outcome and should be approved, while the Building and Construction Trades Union (BCTU) and the Transport Workers Union of Australia (TWUA) opposed the application, claiming that the agreement was not a good faith bargaining outcome and should not be approved.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the collective agreement was a good faith bargaining outcome. The Commission needed to consider whether the agreement was negotiated in good faith by the parties, whether it complied with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act, and whether it was in the best interests of the employees covered by the agreement. The Commission also needed to consider whether the agreement was consistent with the principles of enterprise bargaining as set out in the Fair Work Act.

The Commission found that the agreement was a good faith bargaining outcome. The Commission noted that the agreement was negotiated over a period of several months, with multiple meetings between the parties, and that both parties had made genuine attempts to reach an agreement. The Commission also found that the agreement complied with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act and that it was in the best interests of the employees covered by the agreement. The Commission rejected the objections raised by the BCTU and TWUA, finding that they did not have standing to object to the application and that their objections were not well-founded.

The Commission approved the collective agreement, finding that it was a good faith bargaining outcome that complied with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act and was in the best interests of the employees covered by the agreement. The Commission made orders approving the agreement and setting out the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement. The BCTU and TWUA were ordered to pay the costs of the application.

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