DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2017/507)

MARK ANTHONY WEBSTER T/A CRE8 INTERIORS AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015 - 2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 3 MARCH 2017

Application for approval of the Mark Anthony Webster T/A Cre8 Interiors and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015 - 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Mark Anthony Webster T/A Cre8 Interiors and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015 - 2019. (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 3 March 2017. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 2 July 2019

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union brought an application to the Fair Work Commission seeking approval of a proposed collective agreement. The agreement was between the Union and Mark Anthony Webster, trading as Cre8 Interiors, and covered the period from 2015 to 2019. The primary focus of the case was to determine whether the proposed agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether it was in the best interests of the employees covered by the agreement.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of the employees and the employer, whether it complied with statutory provisions regarding minimum entitlements, and whether the process by which the agreement was negotiated and agreed upon was fair and transparent. The Union argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable, while the employer raised concerns about certain provisions that he believed were overly restrictive or detrimental to the business.

The Commission examined the content of the agreement, the negotiation process, and the evidence presented by both parties. It found that the agreement met the statutory requirements and provided a fair balance of rights and obligations between the employer and employees. The Commission also noted that the negotiation process was conducted in good faith and that the agreement reflected the reasonable needs of the employees. Consequently, the Commission approved the collective agreement, finding it to be in the best interests of the employees. The employer's concerns were addressed through specific provisions within the agreement, which the Commission deemed acceptable. The Union's application was thus successful, and the collective agreement was approved for the specified period.

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