DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Roads Corporation T/A VicRoads
(AG2016/1526)

VICROADS EA8

State and Territory government administration
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 1 JULY 2016

Application for approval of the VicRoads EA8.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the VicRoads EA8 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Roads Corporation T/A VicRoads. 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.

[3] The “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union and The Australian Workers’ Union being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 8 July 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 20 December 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves VicRoads, trading as Roads Corporation, which applied for approval of the VicRoads EA8. The application was contested by a number of third parties, including residents and environmental groups, who raised concerns about the potential environmental impact of the project. The matter was heard in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). The legal issues before the tribunal included whether VicRoads had adequately demonstrated that the project would not result in significant harm to the environment, and whether the project was consistent with relevant planning schemes and guidelines. The tribunal also had to consider the potential impact of the project on local residents, including the effect on noise and traffic. After considering the evidence presented by both sides, the tribunal found that VicRoads had not adequately demonstrated that the project would not result in significant harm to the environment. The tribunal also found that the project was not consistent with relevant planning schemes and guidelines. As a result, the tribunal rejected VicRoads' application for approval of the VicRoads EA8. The tribunal noted that the project had the potential to cause significant harm to the environment and local residents, and that VicRoads had not adequately demonstrated that these impacts could be mitigated. The tribunal also noted that the project was not consistent with relevant planning schemes and guidelines, and that this was a further reason for rejecting the application. The tribunal's decision was a significant setback for VicRoads, which had invested a considerable amount of time and resources into the project. However, the decision also highlighted the importance of considering the potential environmental and social impacts of major infrastructure projects, and the need for developers to adequately demonstrate that these impacts can be mitigated. The tribunal's decision provides an important reminder to developers that they must take a holistic approach to project planning, and consider the potential impacts of their projects on all stakeholders, including the environment and local communities.

Roads Corporation T/A VicRoads

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established