Fulton Hogan Construction Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 4684

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Fulton Hogan Construction Pty Ltd
(AG2013/7097)

FULTON HOGAN PRECAST ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013-2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RYAN	MELBOURNE, 15 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Fulton Hogan Precast Enterprise Agreement 2013-2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Fulton Hogan Precast Enterprise Agreement 2013-2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) and was made by Fulton Hogan Construction Pty Ltd. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss186, 187 and 188 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[3] Undertakings have been given in relation to several clauses of the Agreement and those undertakings have become terms of the Agreement in accordance with s.191(1) of the Act and are appended at Appendix A.

[4] The agreement does not contain a flexibility clause. Pursuant to s.202(4) of the Act, the model flexibility term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1), will operate from 22 July 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 21 July 2016.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE402378 PR538919>
APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Fulton Hogan Construction Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the Fulton Hogan Precast Enterprise Agreement 2013-2016. The applicant, a construction company, sought to have the agreement approved as a low-paid enterprise agreement under section 233 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was made in accordance with section 234 of the Act. The applicant argued that the agreement provided for pay and conditions that were no less favourable than those provided by the relevant industrial instrument, and that the agreement was in the public interest.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act, and whether the agreement was in the public interest. The Commission considered whether the agreement provided for pay and conditions that were no less favourable than those provided by the relevant industrial instrument, and whether the agreement met the requirements of section 234 of the Fair Work Act. The Commission also considered whether the agreement was in the public interest, having regard to the public interest factors set out in section 235 of the Fair Work Act.

The Commission found that the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and was in the public interest. The Commission found that the agreement provided for pay and conditions that were no less favourable than those provided by the relevant industrial instrument. The Commission also found that the agreement met the requirements of section 234 of the Fair Work Act, and that it was in the public interest. The Commission noted that the agreement would provide for greater flexibility and productivity in the workplace, and would assist in the company's efforts to remain competitive in a difficult economic environment. The Commission also noted that the agreement would provide for a fair and reasonable outcome for employees.

The Commission approved the agreement as a low-paid enterprise agreement under section 233 of the Fair Work Act. The applicant was granted leave to apply for approval of the agreement, and the agreement was approved as a low-paid enterprise agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established