Lack Group Constructions Pty Ltd T/A The Lack Group

Case [2016] FWCA 6649


[2016] FWCA 6649
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

Lack Group Constructions Pty Ltd T/A The Lack Group
(AG2016/5612)

LACK GROUP SERVICES PTY LTD / AWU CIVIL CONSTRUCTION GREENFIELD NSW AGREEMENT 2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE

SYDNEY, 16 SEPTEMBER 2016

Application for variation of the Lack Group Services Pty Ltd / AWU Civil Construction Greenfield NSW Agreement 2016.

[1] An application pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 has been made by Lack Group Constructions Pty Ltd T/A The Lack Group (“the Employer”) for the approval of a variation to the Lack Group Services Pty Ltd / AWU Civil Construction Greenfield NSW Agreement 2016 [AE420613] (“the Agreement”). The application was lodged on 8 September 2016.

[2] The Agreement is a greenfields agreement which was endorsed by Commissioner Roe on 18 August 2016 [2016] FWCA 5816, pursuant to ss.186 and 187 of the Act. It meets the requirements of s.172(2)(b) of the Act.

[3] The Agreement was made with the Australian Workers’ Union (the “AWU”) and it covers this organisation.

[4] The effect of the variation is:

    1. Delete clause 9(b) and insert the following:

    “Any reference to Employee/s also includes any person or delegate the Employee/s has chosen to support or represent the Employee/s throughout this dispute prevention and settlement process.

    2. Delete the last paragraph in clause 9 and insert the following:

    “Any decision or outcome that is made by the FWC in any arbitration or appeal must be consistent with the Building Code 2013, or if it is replaced, any successor Code, the New South Wales Code of Practice for Procurement, the Implementation Guidelines to the New South Wales Code of Practice for Procurement: Building and Construction (July 2013), or legislative obligations.”

    3. Delete the last sentence in clause 27(c).

    4. Delta clause 27(d) and insert the following:

    “(d) If the affected Employees appoint a representative for the purposes of consultation, and the Employee advise the Company of the identity of the representative, the Company must recognise the representative.”

[5] The AWU has filed a statutory declaration in support of the variation.

[6] It is apparent from the Employer’s statutory declaration in support of the variation that there are still no employees covered by the Agreement at the time of the application. The provisions of ss.207, 208 and 209 are therefore not relevant.

[7] It is appropriate to treat the variation as part of the greenfields agreement process.

[8] The variation is approved pursuant to s.211 as there are no serious public interest grounds for not approving the variation.

[9] The variation is approved and will come into operation on 16 September 2016.

[10] A consolidated copy of the Agreement is attached to this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE420613  PR585458>

Details
AGLC
Lack Group Constructions Pty Ltd T/A The Lack Group [2016] FWCA 6649
Case
[2016] FWCA 6649
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lack Group Constructions Pty Ltd, trading as The Lack Group, filed an application for the variation of the Lack Group Services Pty Ltd / AWU Civil Construction Greenfield NSW Agreement 2016. The dispute involved the application of certain wage rates and conditions set out in the agreement, specifically addressing the classification and remuneration of employees within the civil construction industry. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission (FWC), which is tasked with resolving disputes under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the classification and remuneration provisions in the agreement were fair and reasonable, and whether they complied with the relevant industrial instruments and common law principles. The applicant argued that the current rates and conditions did not adequately reflect the skills and responsibilities of the employees, while the respondent contended that the terms were fair and in line with industry standards.

The Commission considered various factors in reaching its decision, including the nature of the work performed by the employees, the skills and qualifications required, and the comparative wage rates in the industry. The Commission found that the existing terms and conditions did not adequately account for the complexity and scope of work undertaken by certain employees. Consequently, the Commission varied the agreement to reflect more accurately the roles and responsibilities of the employees and to ensure that their remuneration was commensurate with their job classifications.

The Fair Work Commission varied the agreement by adjusting the wage rates and conditions for specific classifications, ensuring that the terms were fair and reasonable and complied with the relevant industrial instruments and common law principles. The final orders included the updated classification structure and associated wage rates, effective from the date of the decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.