DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/2272)

SHAPESHIFT DESIGN TECHNOLOGIES PTY LTD T/AS SHAPESHIFT DESIGN TECHNOLOGY AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 27 JUNE 2017

Application for approval of the Shapeshift Design Technologies Pty Ltd T/As Shapeshift Design Technology 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 Shapeshift Design Technologies Pty Ltd T/As Shapeshift Design Technology 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 4 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 Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) applied for approval of the Shapeshift Design Technologies Pty Ltd T/As Shapeshift Design Technology and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The application for approval arose because the parties could not agree on certain aspects of the enterprise agreement, particularly regarding the classification and remuneration of employees. The dispute came before the Commission for resolution and approval.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the enterprise agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically concerning the classification of employees and the payment of wages and conditions. The Commission had to ensure the agreement was in accordance with the principles of the Act, particularly that it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees involved. Additionally, the Commission needed to determine whether the agreement provided for appropriate mechanisms for dispute resolution and whether it complied with any relevant awards or other agreements that might be applicable.

After considering the submissions from both parties, the Commission found that the enterprise agreement did meet the statutory requirements for approval. The Commission determined that the classification of employees and the associated remuneration were fair and reasonable, taking into account the nature of the work and industry standards. The Commission also found that the agreement provided adequate mechanisms for dispute resolution and that it did not conflict with any relevant awards or agreements. Consequently, the Commission approved the enterprise agreement, subject to certain conditions that were deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009.

The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the enterprise agreement, with conditions that required the parties to provide ongoing compliance with the Fair Work Act 2009. These conditions ensured that both parties would adhere to the terms and conditions outlined in the approved agreement, and that any future disputes would be handled in accordance with the agreement's dispute resolution provisions. The approval of the enterprise agreement marked the resolution of the dispute between Shapeshift Design Technologies and the CFMEU, allowing both parties to move forward with the implementation of the agreed terms and conditions.

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