DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
(AG2016/6325)

JJ CONTRACT CARPETS PTY LTD AND CFMEU ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016

Building services
COMMISSIONER GREGORY	MELBOURNE, 14 OCTOBER 2016

Application for approval of the JJ Contract Carpets Pty Ltd and CFMEU Enterprise Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the JJ Contract Carpets Pty Ltd and CFMEU Enterprise Agreement 2016 (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 21 October 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 February 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves an application by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) for approval of an enterprise agreement with JJ Contract Carpets Pty Ltd. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The union sought approval for an enterprise agreement which aimed to regulate the terms and conditions of employment for its members working for the company.

The legal issues before the Commission centred on whether the proposed agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the agreement met the statutory requirements for enterprise agreements, including provisions related to minimum entitlements, procedural fairness, and the absence of prohibited content. The company contested the union's application, arguing that the agreement contained provisions that were not compliant with the Act.

In its decision, the Commission examined the provisions of the proposed agreement in detail. The Commission found that while the agreement generally met the requirements of the Fair Work Act, certain clauses did not comply with specific statutory provisions. The Commission highlighted that some of the contested provisions related to the payment of penalty rates and shift loadings, which did not align with the requirements set out in the Act. However, the Commission also noted that these issues could be rectified through minor amendments. Consequently, the Commission approved the agreement with conditions, requiring the parties to revise the non-compliant clauses within a specified timeframe.

The Commission's final order was that the enterprise agreement would be approved subject to the condition that the parties amend the specified clauses within 28 days from the date of the decision to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act. The Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring that all terms of the agreement met the legislative requirements to maintain fairness and protect the rights of the employees and the employer.

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