DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2018/544)

FRESHMORE (NSW) PTY. LTD T/AS ADVANCED PRECAST (AUST) / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2018

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	SYDNEY, 26 MARCH 2018

Application for approval of the Freshmore (NSW) Pty. Ltd t/as Advanced Precast (Aust) / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Freshmore (NSW) Pty. Ltd t/as Advanced Precast (Aust) / CFMEU Collective Agreement 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 2 April 2018. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2018.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application by Freshmore (NSW) Pty. Ltd, trading as Advanced Precast (Aust), for the approval of a collective agreement with the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. The dispute centred on whether the proposed terms and conditions of employment outlined in the agreement complied with the necessary legislative requirements and industrial standards. The application was heard and determined by the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issues revolved around the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically sections relating to the approval of enterprise agreements. The court had to determine whether the proposed agreement met the necessary criteria for approval, including its compliance with the better-off, overall test, and whether it contained provisions that were contrary to public policy or not genuinely an enterprise agreement.

The court carefully examined the provisions of the proposed agreement, considering the nature of the industry, the bargaining positions of the parties, and the implications of the proposed terms on employees. The Commission found that the agreement, while generally in line with the legislative framework, contained certain provisions that did not meet the necessary standards. Specifically, the court identified issues with the proposed shift differentials and the implications for employee entitlements. After considering the submissions from both parties, the court concluded that the agreement did not fully comply with the statutory requirements and was not in the best interests of the employees. Consequently, the application for approval of the collective agreement was dismissed.

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