Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union Summary

[2013] FWCA 9178

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/9893)

C.A.S.C CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD - MAY HOLMAN DEVELOPMENT AND CFMEU GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 22 NOVEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the C.A.S.C Constructions Pty Ltd - May Holman Development and CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the C.A.S.C Constructions Pty Ltd - May Holman Development and CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2013 (Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). It has been made by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

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

[3] I am satisfied that the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, the employee organisation to be covered by the agreement, is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[4]
The Agreement was approved on 22 November 2013 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 29 November 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 22 November 2015.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application for the approval of an agreement between C.A.S.C Constructions Pty Ltd and May Holman Development, with the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) as the relevant trade union. The CFMEU sought the approval of the Greenfields Agreement 2013, which aimed to establish terms and conditions of employment for workers involved in construction projects under the applicants' control. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's industrial relations tribunal.

The central legal issue revolved around whether the proposed agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement was a "registerable" agreement, whether it provided for a safety net of minimum entitlements, and if it complied with the procedural requirements for registration. The CFMEU argued that the agreement was fair and met all legislative requirements, while C.A.S.C Constructions Pty Ltd and May Holman Development contended that certain provisions of the agreement were not in line with the statutory criteria.

In its decision, the court examined the provisions of the agreement and found that it substantially complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The court held that the agreement was a bona fide attempt to create a safety net of minimum entitlements and met the criteria for registration. The court also determined that the procedural requirements for registration were satisfied, including proper consultation and the absence of any unfair provisions. Consequently, the court approved the Greenfields Agreement 2013, finding it to be fair and compliant with the relevant legislation.

The Fair Work Commission approved the C.A.S.C Constructions Pty Ltd - May Holman Development and CFMEU Greenfields Agreement 2013. The agreement was registered, and the parties were directed to implement the terms as set out in the approved agreement. The court's decision provided clarity on the requirements for approving enterprise agreements and reinforced the importance of ensuring that such agreements meet the legislative standards for fairness and compliance.

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established