DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Creteform Pty Ltd
(AG2016/7436)

CRETEFORM PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT [2013 – 2017]

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER MCKENNA	SYDNEY, 12 DECEMBER 2016

Application for variation of the Creteform Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement [2013 – 2017].

[1] An application has been made for the approval of a variation of the Creteform Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement [2013 – 2017] (“the Agreement”). The application has been made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) by Creteform Pty Ltd.

[2] The variation can be found at Attachment A of this decision.

[3] I am satisfied the relevant requirements of s.210 and s.211 of the Act concerning this application for approval have been met.

[4] The application for the variation of the Agreement is approved and the variation will operate from 12 December 2016.

[5] A consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE406045 PR588413>
Attachment A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Creteform Pty Ltd was the applicant before the Fair Work Commission seeking to vary the Enterprise Agreement with its employees for the period 2013 to 2017. The proposed variations included amendments to the payment of allowances and entitlements. The nature of the dispute centred on whether the proposed changes were justifiable under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed variations were in line with the principles of the Fair Work Act, and whether the applicant had demonstrated a genuine need for the changes. The Commission had to consider whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to support the need for the amendments, and whether the changes would maintain a fair and reasonable balance of rights and obligations between the employer and the employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that the applicant had not adequately demonstrated the need for the proposed variations. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining a fair and reasonable balance between the parties' rights and obligations. It held that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to justify the changes to the payment of allowances and entitlements. Consequently, the application for variation was dismissed. The Commission underscored the importance of employers providing comprehensive and convincing evidence when seeking to alter established agreements to ensure that the changes are justified and maintain fairness.

Creteform Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established