DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/5157)

ATLANTIC INTERIOR DESIGNS PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2017 - 2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER CIRKOVIC	MELBOURNE, 20 NOVEMBER 2017

Application for approval of the Atlantic Interior Designs Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2017 - 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Atlantic Interior Designs Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2017 - 2018 (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 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[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. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 20 November 2017 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 27 November 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an application by Atlantic Interior Designs Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) to have their 2017-2018 collective agreement approved. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission of Australia. The central dispute revolved around whether the proposed collective agreement complied with the relevant statutory requirements and did not contain any provisions that were against the public interest or otherwise unenforceable.

The legal issues before the Commission were primarily concerned with the enforceability of the agreement, its alignment with the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether any of its provisions were contrary to public policy or unenforceable. The Commission needed to assess the fairness of the agreement's terms and its compatibility with broader labour and employment laws.

The Commission examined the agreement in detail, considering each clause and its implications. It found that the agreement contained provisions that were not compliant with the statutory requirements, including certain clauses that were deemed to be against public policy. The Commission highlighted that the agreement had been entered into without proper consultation and negotiation processes, which was a significant factor in its decision. As a result, the Commission refused to approve the collective agreement, citing its non-compliance with the necessary legal standards and the absence of proper procedural safeguards.

The Fair Work Commission determined that the agreement did not meet the statutory criteria for approval and was therefore unenforceable. The Commission's decision underscored the importance of adherence to procedural fairness and the need for collective agreements to align with the overarching legal framework governing industrial relations in Australia.

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