DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/4353)

PRO CORE CONCRETE CUTTING & SAWING PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) CONCRETE SAWING AND DRILLING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 17 OCTOBER 2017

Application for approval of the Pro Core Concrete Cutting & Sawing Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Concrete Sawing and Drilling Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Pro Core Concrete Cutting & Sawing Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Concrete Sawing and Drilling Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018 (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 24 October 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

The case involved an application for the approval of an enterprise agreement between Pro Core Concrete Cutting & Sawing Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (Victorian Construction and General Division). The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian federal statutory court focused on workplace relations. The union sought to have the enterprise agreement, which outlined terms and conditions of employment for concrete sawing and drilling workers, approved by the Commission. Pro Core, the employer, contested the approval on various grounds, primarily arguing that the agreement contained provisions that were not in the best interests of the employees.

The legal issues the court was required to decide centred on whether the enterprise agreement met the criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved examining if the agreement was made in good faith, if it provided for the proper classification of employees, and if it contained terms and conditions that were fair and reasonable. Additionally, the court had to determine if the agreement was free from any invalid provisions that might render it unenforceable.

The Fair Work Commission found that the enterprise agreement was largely compliant with the statutory requirements. The court held that the agreement was made in good faith and provided for proper classification and fair terms for the employees. However, the court did find that some provisions were not in the best interests of the employees, specifically those related to shift penalties and overtime. Consequently, the Commission disallowed these provisions and approved the agreement with those sections removed. The employer’s contention that the agreement was not in the best interests of employees was not upheld in its entirety, and the agreement was approved with modifications.

The final orders of the Commission were that the enterprise agreement, with the specified provisions disallowed, was approved as meeting the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The modifications included the removal of certain shift penalties and overtime provisions, ensuring the agreement was fair and in the best interests of the employees. The approved agreement was to be registered with the Commission, and the parties were required to implement the terms as per the modified agreement.

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