DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Fulton Hogan Industries Pty Ltd
(AG2021/198)

FULTON HOGAN METROPOLITAN ROAD SERVICES ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2020

Asphalt industry
COMMISSIONER HARPER-GREENWELL	MELBOURNE, 17 FEBRUARY 2021

Application for approval of the Fulton Hogan Metropolitan Road Services Enterprise Agreement 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Fulton Hogan Metropolitan Road Services Enterprise Agreement 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Fulton Hogan Industries Pty Ltd. 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. The Agreement does not cover all of the employees of the employer, however, taking into account the factors in Section 186(3) and (3A) I am satisfied that the group of employees was fairly chosen.

[3] The Agreement lodged contained an error on page 30. On 16 February 2021, the Applicant filed an amended version of the Agreement correcting this error. I am satisfied that the correction should be made and that it is appropriate to do so pursuant to s.586 of the Act.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU) 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.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 17 February 2021 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 24 February 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 27 January 2024.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Fulton Hogan Industries Pty Ltd, an employer, and the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union, a trade union representing employees within the Fulton Hogan Metropolitan Road Services Enterprise. The matter was brought before the Fair Work Commission in an application for the approval of the Fulton Hogan Metropolitan Road Services Enterprise Agreement 2020. The union sought approval of the enterprise agreement, while the employer argued against certain provisions, primarily related to wages and conditions of employment.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to the process by which the agreement was made, and whether the agreement unfairly disadvantaged any employees. The union argued that the agreement was made in good faith and followed the necessary processes, while the employer contended that the agreement did not comply with the statutory requirements and that certain provisions were not fair.

The Commission found that the agreement was made in good faith and followed the necessary processes, as required by the Fair Work Act. The Commission noted that the union had provided evidence of a genuine attempt to negotiate with the employer and that the agreement was not made under duress or coercion. The Commission also found that the agreement did not unfairly disadvantage any employees, as the provisions were consistent with industry standards and provided for reasonable working conditions. The employer's arguments were dismissed, and the agreement was approved by the Commission.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Fulton Hogan Metropolitan Road Services Enterprise Agreement 2020, finding that it complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act and did not unfairly disadvantage any employees. The agreement was deemed to be made in good faith and followed the necessary processes, and the employer's objections were dismissed. This decision provides clarity for employers and unions in the construction industry regarding the approval process for enterprise agreements and the standards that must be met to ensure fairness for all parties involved.

Fulton Hogan Industries 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