[2013] FWCA 6227 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/8611)
BJ ROBERTSON HOLDINGS PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2015
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT WATSON | MELBOURNE, 30 AUGUST 2013 |
Application for approval of the BJ Robertson Holdings 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 BJ Robertson Holdings 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 6 September 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, AE403492 PR540859>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCA 6227
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 6227
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to determine whether the agreement was a lawful agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The court considered whether the agreement contained a term that was inconsistent with the Act. The court considered the nature of the term, whether it was contrary to a provision of the Act, and whether the term was necessary for the operation of the agreement. The court also considered the effect of the term on the parties and whether the term was reasonably required for the protection of the employees.
The court held that the agreement was a lawful agreement under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The court found that the term in question was not contrary to a provision of the Act and was necessary for the operation of the agreement. The court also found that the term was reasonably required for the protection of the employees. The court approved the agreement, and the employer was ordered to give effect to the agreement.
No further orders were made by the court.
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.