DECISION

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

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2014/8297)

MASTER COATING (AUST) PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2014 - 2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 16 DECEMBER 2014

Application for approval of the Master Coating (Aust) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known asthe Master Coating (Aust) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014 - 2017 (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 30 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) applied for the approval of a collective agreement with Master Coating (Aust) Pty Ltd for the period 2014 to 2017. The CFMEU sought to have the agreement approved as a modern award, which would mean it would have the same effect as a registered agreement, despite not being formally registered by the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred on whether the agreement met the necessary standards for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the collective agreement, which was not registered, contained terms and conditions that were substantially better, better or no worse than the applicable award and met the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission had to determine if the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace, included minimum entitlements, and did not undermine the registered system. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the agreement would promote simplification and clarity in the workplace relations system.

In reaching its decision, the Fair Work Commission considered the terms of the agreement, the comparison with the relevant award, and the overall impact on the workplace. The Commission found that the agreement provided for fair and efficient workplace practices and did not undermine the registered system. The agreement included minimum entitlements that were at least as good as those in the applicable award, and it promoted simplification and clarity in the workplace relations system. Based on these findings, the Commission approved the collective agreement as a modern award, effective from the period 2014 to 2017. This approval ensured that the agreement would have the same legal effect as a registered agreement during the specified period.

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