Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

Case [2013] FWCA 3347


[2013] FWCA 3347

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/1239)

WAGSTAFF PILING PTY LTD AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2011-2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS

BRISBANE, 28 MAY 2013

Application for approval of the Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd 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 22 May 2013 by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (“the CFMEU”) for the approval of a single-enterprise agreement known as the Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015 (“the Agreement”).

[2] For the avoidance of doubt, I note the following.

  • Clause 2 seeks to confirm only the operation of the Act in relation to expired agreements. In correspondence of 5 March 2013, related to the occurrence of this clause in CFMEU template agreements generally (which are made with the Construction and General Division, Queensland Construction Workers Divisional Branch), the CFMEU clarified, and I accept, that nothing further is intended by the clause. I make further comment on this clause below.


  • Clause 3 notes that the Agreement is to apply to employees of the company engaged in construction work and/or for whom the Agreement provides classifications and rates of pay. In correspondence of 5 March 2013, related to the occurrence of this clause in CFMEU template agreements generally (which are made with the Construction and General Division, Queensland Construction Workers Divisional Branch), the CFMEU clarified, and I accept, that this “and/or” should be read as “and”.


  • 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.”

[1] 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). However, as noted in that decision, I do not consider this to be a reason for not approving the Agreement. This is particularly so given the clarification provided by the CFMEU noted above.

[2] 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, and consequently, cannot impose the obligations upon the employer it seeks to impose.

[3] 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.

[4] 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.

[5] 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, AE401459  PR537284>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCA 3347
Case
[2013] FWCA 3347
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) applied for approval of the Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2011-2015. The dispute arose in the Fair Work Commission (FWC), the decision of which was then appealed to the Federal Court. The CFMEU sought approval of a collective agreement that had been negotiated with Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd. The key legal issues involved the interpretation of certain provisions within the agreement and whether they complied with the relevant industrial legislation. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement's terms were consistent with the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether they adhered to the principles of good faith bargaining and procedural fairness.

The court examined the procedural aspects of the agreement's formation and the substantive terms, ensuring they met the statutory requirements and did not contravene any legislative provisions. The CFMEU argued that the agreement was the result of genuine collective bargaining, while the respondent contested the validity of some clauses. The court found that the negotiation process had been conducted in good faith and that the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable. It concluded that the agreement did not contravene any provisions of the Fair Work Act and that the FWC had correctly approved it. The appeal was dismissed, and the approval of the collective agreement was upheld.

The court's decision confirmed the approval of the collective agreement between the CFMEU and Wagstaff Piling Pty Ltd for the period 2011-2015. The court's reasoning underscored the importance of genuine collective bargaining and the need for agreements to comply with legislative standards. The final orders of the court affirmed the decision of the FWC, rejecting the appeal and upholding the approval of the collective agreement.

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.