Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

Case [2013] FWCA 5695


[2013] FWCA 5695

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/2285)

KARZAC DISCRETIONARY TRUST T/A QUICK - FIX ALUMINIUM AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2011-2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS

BRISBANE, 13 AUGUST 2013

Application for approval of the Karzac Discretionary Trust T/A Quick - Fix Aluminium 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 8 August 2013 by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (“the CFMEU”) for the approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Karzac Discretionary Trust T/A Quick - Fix Aluminium and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015 (“the Agreement”).

[2] 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).

[3] 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.

[4] In relation to clause 41 of the Agreement (“visa compliance”) which refers to apparent obligations upon the employer to do certain things where “temporary foreign labour” is engaged, I note that a recent decision of the Fair Work Commission 1 has found that a clause in such terms as clause 41 of the Agreement is not permitted content (again, for the purposes of s.172 of the Act), and consequently, cannot impose the obligations upon the employer it seeks to impose.

[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

 1   Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Baulderstone Pty Ltd[2013] FWC 2671 (O’Callaghan SDP).

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE403095  PR540204>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCA 5695
Case
[2013] FWCA 5695
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court was an application by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for approval of the Karzac Discretionary Trust trading as Quick-Fix Aluminium and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015. The application was brought under the Fair Work Act 2009, which provides a framework for the regulation of industrial relations in Australia. The dispute centred around the validity and approval of the collective agreement, which was intended to cover employees of the Quick-Fix Aluminium business.

The court was required to determine whether the collective agreement met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act. Key issues included whether the agreement had been made in good faith and whether it complied with the provisions of the Act. The court had to assess the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it included the necessary elements, such as minimum terms and conditions of employment. Additionally, the court needed to ensure that the agreement did not discriminate against any employees or contravene any other relevant legislation.

In delivering the judgment, the court examined the evidence presented by the CFMEU regarding the negotiation and content of the collective agreement. The court found that the agreement was made in good faith and that it contained all the necessary minimum terms and conditions as required by the Fair Work Act. The court also determined that the agreement did not discriminate against any class of employees and was consistent with other relevant legislation. As a result, the court approved the collective agreement.

The court's final orders were to approve the Karzac Discretionary Trust trading as Quick-Fix Aluminium and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015, thereby allowing it to be registered and enforced under the Fair Work Act. This decision provided legal certainty to the employees covered by the agreement and established a framework for their employment conditions for the specified period.

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.