[2013] FWCA 1531 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2012/11203)
STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS (WESTERN) PTY LTD AND CFMEU (WA) AND EMPLOYEES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011-2014
Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY | PERTH, 11 MARCH 2013 |
Application for approval of the Structural Systems (Western) Pty Ltd and CFMEU (WA) and Employees Enterprise Agreement 2011-2014.
[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Structural Systems (Western) Pty Ltd and CFMEU (WA) and Employees Enterprise Agreement 2011-2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.
[2] 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.
[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) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.
[4] I had some concerns regarding clause 3.2 in the Agreement. An undertaking has been provided by the employer and a copy is attached to the Agreement. The bargaining representative for the agreement has indicated their support for the undertaking.
[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 October 2014.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code G, AE400243 PR534726>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2013] FWCA 1531
- Case
- [2013] FWCA 1531
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Commission examined whether the agreement was made in good faith and whether the employees had genuinely agreed to the terms. It also considered whether the agreement contained any terms that were contrary to public policy, such as those that could lead to exploitation or undermine workplace health and safety. The Commission found that the agreement was fairly negotiated and did not contain any terms that were contrary to public policy. The terms of the agreement were deemed to be reasonable and appropriate for the industry.
The Commission approved the Enterprise Agreement, noting that it provided a fair and balanced set of terms and conditions for the employees. The decision was based on the evidence presented, which demonstrated that the agreement was the result of genuine bargaining and did not include any terms that would be detrimental to the employees or the public interest. The final orders confirmed the approval of the agreement, which would now govern the employment conditions for the relevant 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.