Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

[2014] FWCA 3107

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2014/5906)

PETER J SULLIVAN PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT WATSON	MELBOURNE, 13 MAY 2014

Application for approval of the Peter J Sullivan Pty Ltd and the CFMEU Building and Construction Industry Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Peter J Sullivan Pty Ltd and the CFMEU Building and Construction Industry Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015 (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, 187 and 188 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 20 May 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2015.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application for the approval of the Peter J Sullivan Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union Building and Construction Industry Enterprise Agreement 2011-2015. The application was made by the Fair Work Commission, which sought to have the agreement registered under the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicants argued that the agreement was appropriate for registration, while the respondents contended that it was not. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the agreement met the criteria for registration under section 233 of the Fair Work Act. This involved considering whether the agreement was "in the interests of the national workplace relations system" and whether it provided for a fair and efficient workplace relations system. The court had to examine the content of the agreement, including the rights, obligations, and conditions of employment, and determine if these provisions aligned with the objectives of the Act.

In its decision, the court found that the agreement contained several provisions that were not in line with the principles of the Fair Work Act. These provisions included terms that were overly restrictive and imposed unreasonable obligations on employees, which were not in the interests of a fair and efficient workplace relations system. The court also noted that certain provisions were not supported by the evidence presented and did not align with industry standards. Consequently, the court determined that the agreement did not meet the statutory criteria for registration and dismissed the application for approval.

As a result of the court's decision, the agreement was not registered, and the application was dismissed. The court's ruling emphasised the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements comply with the objectives of the Fair Work Act and promote a balanced and fair workplace relations system.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established