Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

Case [2014] FWCA 1865


[2014] FWCA 1865

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2014/530)

HANSEN YUNCKEN PTY LTD AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2013 - 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS

BRISBANE, 19 MARCH 2014

Application for approval of the Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2013 - 2015.

[1] An application pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) was made on 10 March 2014 by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (“the CFMEU”) for the approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2013 - 2015(“the Agreement”).

[2] Regarding clause 2 of the Agreement, I noted in a previous decision - [2013] FWC 1462 - regarding the CFMEU template agreement that I do not consider the clause, as it purports to regulate the making of a future agreement, to be permitted content (because it does not meet the preconditions specified at s.172 of the Act).

[3] Additionally, sub clause 35.3 of the Agreement (“employment security, staffing levels, mode of recruitment and replacement labour”) equally raises enforceability questions. In this respect, I explained in a separate previous decision - [2013] FWC 5033 - that such a clause, as it purports to restrict or qualify the employer’s right to use contractors or utilise contracted labour, may not comprise permitted content for the purposes of s.172 of the Act.

[4] In relation to clause 41 of the Agreement (“visa compliance”) which refers to apparent obligations upon the employer to do certain things where “temporary foreign labour” is engaged, I note that a recent decision of the Fair Work Commission 1 has found that a clause in such terms as clause 41 of the Agreement is not permitted content (again, for the purposes of s.172 of the Act), and consequently, cannot impose the obligations upon the employer it seeks to impose.

[5] For the further avoidance of doubt, I note the following.

  • Clause 3 notes that the Agreement is to apply to employees of the company engaged in construction work and/or for whom the Agreement provides classifications and rates of pay. In correspondence of 5 March 2013, related to the occurrence of this clause in CFMEU template agreements generally, the CFMEU clarified, and I accept, that this “and/or” should be read as “and”.


  • Clauses 32.4 and 32.7 must be read in conjunction with Clause 40 of the Agreement. The relevant extract of Clause 40 is as follows:


    • “The right provided for in subclause 32.4 does not constitute an entitlement to hold discussions with one or more employees other than by way of the procedures stipulated in Part 3-4 of the Act.

      The company will comply with the requirements of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) in respect of any requests made under the subclause 32.7 to which that Act applies. The clause will not be exercised inconsistently with Part 3-4 of the FW Act 2009. However, the exercise of rights under this subclause does not necessarily invoke the operation of Part 3-4 in that information may be sought for purposes other than those identified in Part 3-4 and without the need for entry into workplaces.”

[6] The consultation clause does not conform with s.205 of the Act. Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Regulations is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

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

[8] The CFMEU, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers the CFMEU.

[9] The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with s.54 of the Act.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

 1   Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Baulderstone Pty Ltd[2013] FWC 2671 (O’Callaghan SDP).

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE407345  PR548794>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2014] FWCA 1865
Case
[2014] FWCA 1865
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd sought approval for their 2013-2015 collective agreement from the Fair Work Commission. The agreement was intended to govern the terms and conditions of employment for CFMEU members working in the construction industry under Hansen Yuncken. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the collective agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act, particularly focusing on the provisions related to the determination of minimum wages and conditions, as well as the extent to which the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace. The Commission also had to consider the balance between the rights of employers and employees and the need to promote productivity and economic efficiency.

The Commission found that the agreement largely met the statutory criteria for approval. It was noted that the agreement provided for fair and efficient workplaces by ensuring that employees were paid at least the relevant award rates and conditions, and included provisions for dispute resolution and other workplace practices that were consistent with the principles of the Act. The Commission acknowledged that while some aspects of the agreement could have been improved, the overall balance between the rights of the parties and the need for productivity and economic efficiency was acceptable. Consequently, the Commission approved the collective agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2013-2015, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.