[2013] FWCA 8824 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/11150)
NORTHSIDE DEMOLITIONS PTY. LTD. AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2011-2015
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS | BRISBANE, 8 NOVEMBER 2013 |
Application for approval of the Northside Demolitions Pty. Ltd. 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 1 November 2013 by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (“the CFMEU”) for the approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Northside Demolitions Pty. Ltd. and CFMEU union collective agreement 2011-2015 (“the Agreement”).
[2] The Agreement was not lodged within 14 days after it was made. The Applicant has provided an explanation which I have found to be satisfactory. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b) I consider it fair to extend the time for making this application.
[3] 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).
[4] 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.
[5] For the further avoidance of doubt, I note the following.
- 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] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with s.54 of the Act.
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE405279 PR544348>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCA 8824
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 8824
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues that the Commission was required to address included whether the agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether any of the provisions contravened the provisions concerning genuine agreement and good faith bargaining. Specifically, the company contested certain wage rates and conditions, arguing they were excessive and not reflective of a genuine agreement.
In delivering its decision, the Commission thoroughly examined the evidence presented by both parties regarding the nature of the bargaining process and the reasonableness of the terms proposed. It found that the agreement reflected a genuine consensus between the parties and did not contravene any statutory provisions. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement was made in good faith and met all legal requirements. Consequently, the application for approval of the collective agreement was granted.
The Fair Work Commission approved the Northside Demolitions Pty. Ltd. and CFMEU union collective agreement for the period 2011 to 2015, thereby finalising the dispute. The company's objections to certain provisions were dismissed, and the agreement was deemed to comply with all relevant legal standards.
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.