DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/2527)

AZZOPARDI, MATHEW JOSEPH T/AS PRO GLAZE & CAULK AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 -2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 11 JULY 2017

Application for approval of the Azzopardi, Mathew Joseph T/As Pro Glaze & Caulk and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Azzopardi, Mathew Joseph T/As Pro Glaze & Caulk and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) 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 18 July 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

In the matter of an application for approval of the Azzopardi, Mathew Joseph T/As Pro Glaze & Caulk and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the fairness and appropriateness of the proposed enterprise agreement. The application was brought by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, representing the employees, against the employer, Pro Glaze & Caulk. The primary dispute centred on whether the proposed enterprise agreement complied with the relevant legislative provisions and was fair and reasonable in its terms and conditions.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement met the requirements of section 230 of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically whether it provided for a fair and efficient workplace relationship and adequately addressed the needs of the employees. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement contained terms that were contrary to the public interest or that unfairly disadvantaged any party. The Commission also had to assess the process by which the agreement was negotiated and whether it was done in good faith.

After thorough examination of the agreement and the submissions from both parties, the Commission found that the enterprise agreement was fair and reasonable. The agreement provided for a balanced set of terms and conditions that adequately protected the interests of both the employees and the employer. The Commission noted that the negotiation process was conducted in good faith and that the agreement did not contain any terms that were contrary to the public interest or that unfairly disadvantaged any party. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, finding that it met all the necessary statutory criteria and was in the best interests of the employees and the employer alike.

As a result of the Commission's decision, the Azzopardi, Mathew Joseph T/As Pro Glaze & Caulk and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018 was approved and is now in effect. This approval ensures that the terms and conditions set out in the agreement are legally binding and enforceable, providing a framework for a fair and efficient workplace relationship between the employer and the employees represented by the union.

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