DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/6299)

THE TRUSTEE FOR R AND K UNIT TRUST T/A D.B. FARRELL’S PTY LTD AND CFMEU UNION COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2015- 2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 18 OCTOBER 2016

Application for approval of The Trustee for R and K Unit Trust T/A D.B. Farrell’s Pty Ltd and CFMEU Union Collective Agreement 2015- 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as The Trustee for R and K Unit Trust T/A D.B. Farrell’s Pty Ltd 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 25 October 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 2 July 2019.

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 the approval of a collective agreement between itself and The Trustee for R and K Unit Trust T/A D.B. Farrell’s Pty Ltd. The agreement pertained to employees within the construction, forestry, mining and energy industries, specifically those who were employed by D.B. Farrell’s Pty Ltd. The applicant sought to have the agreement registered under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

The primary legal issue for the Commission was whether the collective agreement met the criteria for registration under section 233 of the Act. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to public policy or were otherwise not in the interests of the employees. The Commission also had to consider whether the agreement provided for a fair and efficient workplace, and whether it provided for the protection of employees’ rights and interests.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission determined that the agreement did not meet the criteria for registration. The Commission found that certain provisions of the agreement were contrary to public policy and were not in the interests of the employees. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for a fair and efficient workplace, and that it did not adequately protect the rights and interests of the employees. As a result, the Commission refused to approve the agreement.

The Commission's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The Commission found that certain provisions of the agreement, such as those relating to the use of subcontractors and the payment of wages, were contrary to public policy and were not in the interests of the employees. The Commission also found that the agreement did not provide for a fair and efficient workplace, and that it did not adequately protect the rights and interests of the employees. As a result, the Commission refused to approve the agreement.

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