DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/4839)

ELITE SPLASHBACKS PTY LTD AND CFMEU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 25 OCTOBER 2017

Application for approval of the Elite Splashbacks Pty Ltd and CFMEU Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Elite Splashbacks Pty Ltd and CFMEU Enterprise Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by 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.

[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 is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 1 November 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and Elite Splashbacks Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the approval of the Enterprise Agreement between the parties dated 2016. The Union sought to have the agreement ratified, asserting that it met the requisite standards for a fair and equitable employment arrangement. Conversely, the company contested the approval, raising concerns about several clauses within the agreement, arguing they did not comply with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act.

The primary legal issues before the Commission centred on whether the provisions of the Enterprise Agreement were fair and reasonable in all respects. Specifically, the company questioned the fairness of certain clauses pertaining to employee entitlements, such as leave provisions and redundancy payments, as well as the process for resolving disputes between the parties. The Union, on the other hand, argued that the agreement was comprehensive and reflective of the needs of both employers and employees, adhering to the statutory requirements for approval.

After thorough consideration of the arguments presented, the Commission found that the Enterprise Agreement contained several clauses that were not fair and reasonable. The Commission highlighted that certain provisions regarding employee entitlements did not align with the broader protections afforded under the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the dispute resolution mechanism outlined in the agreement was deemed insufficient to provide adequate protection for employees. Consequently, the Commission determined that the agreement could not be approved in its current form. The Commission ordered that the agreement be returned to the parties for further negotiation and amendment, ensuring that any revised agreement would meet the necessary standards for fairness and reasonableness.

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