DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/7798)

PREMIER CRANES & RIGGING PTY LTD AND THE CFMEU (VICTORIAN CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL DIVISION) RIGGER/STEEL ERECTOR ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 -2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 23 DECEMBER 2016

Application for approval of the Premier Cranes & Rigging Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016 -2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Premier Cranes & Rigging Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Rigger/Steel Erector 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 30 December 2016. 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 applied for approval of the Premier Cranes & Rigging Pty Ltd and the CFMEU (Victorian Construction and General Division) Rigger/Steel Erector Enterprise Agreement 2016-2018. The dispute arose from the parties' disagreement over certain provisions of the proposed agreement, particularly those related to employee entitlements and working conditions. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issues before the Commission involved assessing whether the proposed enterprise agreement provided for the safety, health and welfare of employees, and if it met the "better off overall test" (BOOT) as required by the Fair Work Act. The Commission had to scrutinise the agreement to ensure it adhered to the legislative standards and protected employees' rights effectively. Additionally, the Commission needed to determine whether the agreement facilitated a fair and efficient workplace, balancing the interests of both employers and employees.

After thorough consideration of the arguments presented by both parties and the relevant legal framework, the Commission found that the proposed agreement did not fully meet the statutory requirements. The Commission identified several provisions that failed to adequately protect employees' rights and did not sufficiently address health and safety concerns. Furthermore, the Commission concluded that the agreement did not pass the BOOT test as it did not provide employees with a clear improvement in their overall conditions of employment compared to the applicable awards. Consequently, the Commission rejected the application for approval of the proposed enterprise agreement.

The Commission's decision emphasised the importance of ensuring that enterprise agreements provide fair and adequate protections for employees. By rejecting the proposed agreement, the Commission underscored the necessity for parties to negotiate agreements that not only comply with legal standards but also promote a balanced and equitable working environment. The Commission's ruling serves as a reminder to employers and unions of the critical need to prioritise employee welfare in enterprise bargaining.

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