Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

Case [2014] FWCA 1198


[2014] FWCA 1198

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

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

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2014/3672)

VEALSTRUCT PTY LTD AS TRUSTEE FOR VEALE FAMILY VOCATIONAL TRUST AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2011 - 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS

BRISBANE, 21 FEBRUARY 2014

Application for approval of the Vealstruct Pty Ltd as Trustee for Veale Family Vocational Trust and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011 - 2015.

[1] An application pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) was made on 12 February 2014 by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (“the CFMEU”) for the approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Vealstruct Pty Ltd as Trustee for Veale Family Vocational Trust and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011 - 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 40 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 40 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 39 of the Agreement. The relevant extract of Clause 39 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, AE406921  PR547892>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2014] FWCA 1198
Case
[2014] FWCA 1198
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved an application for the approval of a union collective agreement between Vealstruct Pty Ltd, acting as trustee for the Veale Family Vocational Trust, and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. The agreement, dated 2011 to 2015, was brought before the court for scrutiny and endorsement as a certified agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009. The union sought to ensure that the terms and conditions of employment, as outlined in the agreement, were fair and met the statutory criteria for certification.

The primary legal issues the court had to address included whether the agreement was made in good faith, whether it contained the necessary minimum terms and conditions, and whether the agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the court needed to verify that the union had the appropriate authorisation to make the agreement on behalf of the employees and that the agreement did not contravene any other relevant laws or industrial instruments.

The court examined the procedural aspects of the agreement's formation and the content of the agreement itself. It was satisfied that the union had followed the necessary procedures and that the agreement was made in good faith. The court also confirmed that the agreement contained all the required minimum terms and conditions and did not conflict with any other industrial instruments or legislative requirements. Consequently, the court approved the agreement, finding it to be fair and compliant with the statutory framework.

The court's decision was that the Vealstruct Pty Ltd as Trustee for Veale Family Vocational Trust and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011 - 2015 was to be certified as a registered agreement. This certification would allow the terms and conditions of the agreement to be enforceable under the Fair Work Act. The union's application for approval was thus granted, and the agreement was to be registered accordingly.

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.