DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a greenfields agreement

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union-Construction and General Division
(AG2014/10193)

PARA REO FIX PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2014-2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 13 JANUARY 2015

Application for approval of the Para Reo Fix Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known asthe Para Reo Fix Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (the Applicant). The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (the Union) have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they wish to be covered by the Agreement. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, 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 seven days after the issuing of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved an application for the approval of a collective agreement between Para Reo Fix Pty Ltd and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union-Construction and General Division for the period 2014-2017. The primary dispute centred around the provisions of the proposed agreement, which the employer argued were inconsistent with the Fair Work Act 2009. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the agreement met the necessary standards under the Act and was in the best interests of the employees.

The legal issues before the Commission involved the scrutiny of various clauses within the agreement, particularly those concerning pay rates, conditions of employment, and procedural aspects related to workplace disputes. The employer contended that certain provisions were excessively prescriptive and potentially detrimental to the business operations, while the union argued that the agreement was fair and balanced, reflecting the needs and rights of the employees. The central question was whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and did not unfairly disadvantage either party.

The Commission considered the provisions of the Fair Work Act, along with relevant case law and precedents, to assess the agreement's compliance and fairness. It was noted that the agreement needed to provide for the efficient operation of the business while ensuring that employees' rights and protections were upheld. The Commission found that while some provisions were indeed stringent, they were necessary to protect the employees' interests and did not unduly burden the employer. Consequently, the application for approval was granted, with the agreement being deemed to meet the statutory requirements and being in the best interests of the employees.

The Fair Work Commission approved the collective agreement, subject to the specific terms and conditions outlined in the decision. The employer and the union were directed to adhere to the approved agreement, ensuring that it was implemented and enforced within the stipulated timeframe. This decision underscored the importance of balancing the needs of both employers and employees within the framework of the Fair Work Act.

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union-Construction and General Division

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established