DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/1643)

ROBERT BURNS FAMILY TRUST T/AS BREELY INTERIORS PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) PLASTERING ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016-2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 22 MAY 2017

Application for approval of the Robert Burns Family Trust T/As Breely Interiors Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Plastering Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Robert Burns Family Trust T/As Breely Interiors Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Plastering 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 29 May 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

The applicants in this case, the Robert Burns Family Trust trading as Breely Interiors Pty Ltd, sought approval of an enterprise agreement from the Fair Work Commission. The respondents were the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (Victorian Construction and General Division) and the Breely Interiors Pty Ltd employees represented by the union. The applicants contended that the agreement, which was negotiated in good faith, should be approved as it provided for better working conditions and pay rates for the employees. The union and the employees argued that the agreement did not adequately address certain issues, including the classification of workers and the pay rates for certain job categories. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement met the statutory requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission had to determine if the agreement was fairly and genuinely negotiated in good faith, and if it provided for the terms and conditions of employment for the employees covered by the agreement. The Commission also had to consider if the agreement complied with the "better off overall test," which requires that the agreement must provide for terms and conditions that are no worse than the relevant award or safety net award, and that the employees are better off overall when compared to their previous conditions.

The Commission found that the enterprise agreement was fairly and genuinely negotiated in good faith and met the statutory requirements for approval. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for improved working conditions and pay rates for the employees, and that it complied with the better off overall test. The Commission also found that the agreement adequately addressed the issues raised by the union and the employees, including the classification of workers and the pay rates for certain job categories. The Commission approved the enterprise agreement.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Breely Interiors Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Plastering Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The Commission found that the agreement was fairly and genuinely negotiated in good faith, met the statutory requirements for approval, and provided for terms and conditions of employment that were no worse than the relevant award or safety net award, and that the employees were better off overall when compared to their previous 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