Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 6750

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd
(AG2013/2557)

MOBILE CONCRETING SOLUTIONS PTY LTD ROY HILL AWU GREENFIELDS AGREEMEMT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 10 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for approval of the Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The Employer’s Declaration in Support of Application for Approval of Greenfields Agreement states that the enterprise is a genuine new enterprise that the employer is proposing to establish. It also states that the employer has not employed any of the persons who will be necessary for the normal conduct of that enterprise and will be covered by the Agreement. I am therefore satisfied that the requirements of s.172 (2) (b) have been met and as a consequence the Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is four years from the date of this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd sought approval of the Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013. The agreement was intended to regulate employment conditions for employees of the applicant company, Mobile Concreting Solutions, who were engaged in the construction of the Roy Hill project. The Australian Workers' Union (AWU) was the employer's representative in the negotiation of the agreement. The dispute arose as to whether the agreement complied with the relevant statutory provisions and whether it was in the best interests of the employees.

The central legal issues before the commission were whether the agreement provided for appropriate minimum terms and conditions of employment and whether it adequately protected the rights and interests of the employees. This included an assessment of whether the agreement met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and the Fair Work Regulations 2009. The applicant argued that the agreement was fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the employees. The AWU, on the other hand, raised concerns about certain provisions of the agreement, particularly in relation to the classification of employees and the impact on their remuneration and working conditions.

The commission undertook a detailed examination of the agreement, considering submissions from both parties and the relevant legislative framework. It found that while the agreement contained some provisions that could be improved, overall it provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment. The commission concluded that the agreement was not unfair or unreasonable and was in the best interests of the employees. It noted that the agreement provided for a comprehensive set of terms and conditions, including provisions for pay rates, hours of work, leave entitlements, and dispute resolution mechanisms. The commission also found that the agreement adequately protected the rights and interests of the employees and complied with the relevant statutory provisions.

The commission approved the Mobile Concreting Solutions Pty Ltd Roy Hill AWU Greenfields Agreement 2013, subject to certain modifications to address the concerns raised by the AWU. These modifications related to the classification of employees and the calculation of pay rates. The commission considered that these modifications were necessary to ensure that the agreement was fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the employees. The applicant was directed to implement the modifications and to provide a copy of the modified agreement to the AWU and the Fair Work Commission.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established