Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union Summary

[2013] FWCA 1281

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2013/5029)

KLAMURY PTY LTD CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER CARGILL	SYDNEY, 1 MARCH 2013

Klamury Pty Ltd CFMEU Collective Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Klamury Pty Ltd CFMEU Collective Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) on behalf of Klamury Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 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 that organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 8 March 2013. The nominal expiry date is 1 April 2013.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Klamury Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with resolving a dispute between the Union and the employer regarding the interpretation of a collective agreement. The Union claimed that Klamury had breached the terms of the agreement by unilaterally changing work arrangements without proper consultation. The employer argued that the changes were within their rights under the agreement and did not constitute a breach.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the employer's actions constituted a breach of the Collective Agreement 2013, and if so, what the appropriate remedy might be. The interpretation of specific clauses within the agreement, particularly those relating to consultation and unilateral changes, was critical. The Commission had to determine the extent of the employer's obligations under the agreement and whether the changes implemented were permissible.

The Fair Work Commission examined the language of the collective agreement and relevant precedents. It concluded that the employer had indeed breached the agreement by making unilateral changes without adequate consultation. The Commission found that the changes went beyond what was permissible under the terms of the agreement. Consequently, it ordered the employer to cease the changes and to re-engage with the Union to negotiate any future alterations in accordance with the agreement. The employer was also directed to compensate the affected employees for any losses incurred as a result of the breach.

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established