[2013] FWCA 9417 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/11605)
COMMERCIAL CLADDING AUSTRALIA PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2015
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT WATSON | MELBOURNE, 3 DECEMBER 2013 |
Application for approval of the Commercial Cladding Australia 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 Commercial Cladding Australia 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 10 December 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 March 2015.
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code J, AE405630 PR545166>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCA 9417
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 9417
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the provisions of the proposed agreement were consistent with the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether they were in the interests of the employees. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the agreement was free from any elements that might unduly restrict the employer’s operational flexibility and whether it provided fair and reasonable terms for the employees. The CFMEU argued that the provisions were necessary to protect the employees' rights and ensure fair working conditions, while the employer contended that the agreement would impose excessive constraints on their business operations.
After reviewing the submissions from both parties, the Commission found that the agreement contained several provisions that went beyond what was necessary to protect employees' rights and were overly restrictive on the employer's operational capacity. The Commission concluded that while the proposed agreement had some merit in protecting the employees, certain provisions were not in the best interests of the employees or the employer. As a result, the Commission decided not to approve the agreement in its current form. The Commission directed the parties to return to the negotiating table to revise the agreement to address the identified concerns.
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.