Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

[2013] FWCA 7230

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/2895)

PRESTON (NSW) PTY LIMITED/CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2013-2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER MACDONALD	SYDNEY, 20 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Preston (NSW) Pty Limited / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2013 - 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Preston (NSW) Pty Limited/CFMEU Collective Agreement 2013-2015 (the Agreement). The application was made by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] 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.

[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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved in accordance with s.54 of the Act and will operate from 27 September 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 May 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties to this case were Preston (NSW) Pty Limited and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The dispute was over the approval of a collective agreement between the two parties for the period 2013 to 2015. This matter was determined by the Fair Work Commission, which is an Australian federal statutory body with the authority to hear and determine employment disputes.

The legal issues that the Fair Work Commission had to address were whether the collective agreement was in the best interests of the employees and whether it complied with the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Act that require it to be free from coercion and undue influence and to provide for the protection of employees' rights.

The Fair Work Commission found that the agreement was in the best interests of the employees and was consistent with the provisions of the Act. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, including provisions for wages, hours of work, and other employment conditions. The Commission also found that the agreement was not inconsistent with the Act's requirements for protection of employees' rights and was free from coercion and undue influence. Accordingly, the Commission approved the collective agreement.

The Fair Work Commission's decision to approve the collective agreement was based on its finding that the agreement provided fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment for the employees and was consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission found that the agreement was not inconsistent with the Act's requirements for protection of employees' rights and was free from coercion and undue influence. The Commission's decision was therefore in the best interests of the employees and in accordance with the law.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established