DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

G.M. Considine Plumbing Pty Ltd
(AG2016/2416)

G.M. CONSIDINE PLUMBING PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2016 - 2020

Plumbing industry
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 29 MARCH 2016

Application for approval of the G.M. Considine Plumbing Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 - 2020.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the G.M. Considine Plumbing Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 - 2020 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by G.M. Considine Plumbing Pty Ltd. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Applicant has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] The Agreement was approved on 29 March 2016 and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 5 April 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 28 March 2020.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was presented with an application for the approval of an enterprise agreement between G.M. Considine Plumbing Pty Ltd and its employees. The employees were represented by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU). The employer contended that the agreement contained provisions that were not consistent with the requirements for an enterprise agreement as outlined in the Fair Work Act 2009. The primary dispute centred on the enforceability of certain provisions in the agreement, specifically those concerning the operation of a "call out" roster and the classification of employees as "casuals" under the agreement.

The key legal issues before the FWC were whether the agreement's provisions adequately reflected the necessary balance between the rights and obligations of the employer and the employees, and whether they complied with the criteria for approval set out in the Fair Work Act. The employer argued that the agreement's provisions on the "call out" roster and the classification of employees as "casuals" did not align with the spirit of the Act and were potentially unfair. The union, on the other hand, defended the provisions, asserting that they were necessary to address the specific working conditions and requirements of the plumbing industry.

The FWC carefully considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the specific provisions in question. The Commission determined that the "call out" roster provisions, while potentially onerous for employees, were necessary to accommodate the unpredictable nature of the plumbing work. However, the FWC found that the classification of employees as "casuals" under the agreement did not meet the requirements for a genuine casual position as outlined in the Act. Consequently, the FWC approved the agreement with the condition that the classification of employees be amended to reflect their true employment status, ensuring compliance with the Act.

The final orders of the FWC included the approval of the G.M. Considine Plumbing Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2016 - 2020, subject to the condition that the classification of employees as "casuals" be revised to align with the provisions of the Fair Work Act. The employer was directed to make the necessary amendments to the agreement within a specified timeframe.

G.M. Considine Plumbing 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