DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Simford Engineering Services Pty Ltd
(AG2016/5405)

SIMFORD ENGINEERING SERVICES PTY LTD (WOOLWORTHS DISTRIBUTION CENTRE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, 225 GLASSCOCKS ROAD DANDENONG) COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2016

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 3 OCTOBER 2016

Application for approval of the Simford Engineering Services Pty Ltd (Woolworths Distribution Centre Construction Project, 225 Glasscocks Road Dandenong) Collective Agreement 2016.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Simford Engineering Services Pty Ltd (Woolworths Distribution Centre Construction Project, 225 Glasscocks Road Dandenong) Collective Agreement 2016 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Simford Engineering Services 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] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 10 October 2016. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2017.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Simford Engineering Services Pty Ltd recently sought approval for their collective agreement from the Fair Work Commission. This agreement, covering the Woolworths Distribution Centre Construction Project at 225 Glasscocks Road in Dandenong, was entered into as part of a broader agreement between the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and the Master Builders Association of Victoria. The application was made under section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and the respondents included the CFMEU and Woolworths. The dispute centred on the terms of the agreement and whether it complied with the relevant sections of the Act.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement met the requirements of sections 234(1)(a) and (b) of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine if the agreement was appropriate for the employees covered by it and if it provided for minimum terms and conditions of employment that were no less favourable than the applicable modern award. The Commission also considered if the agreement was necessary to achieve a better outcome for the employees than what would be achieved under the relevant modern award.

In reaching its decision, the Commission noted that the agreement contained provisions that were more favourable to employees than those in the applicable modern award, such as a higher base rate of pay and additional entitlements. The Commission was satisfied that the agreement was appropriate for the employees and that it provided for minimum terms and conditions that were no less favourable than the applicable modern award. Additionally, the Commission found that the agreement was necessary to achieve a better outcome for the employees than what would be achieved under the modern award, given the specific circumstances of the project and the benefits to the employees.

The Fair Work Commission approved the Simford Engineering Services Pty Ltd (Woolworths Distribution Centre Construction Project, 225 Glasscocks Road Dandenong) Collective Agreement 2016, finding it to be appropriate and in compliance with the relevant sections of the Fair Work Act. The agreement was accepted as providing for minimum terms and conditions that were no less favourable than the applicable modern award, and the Commission determined that it was necessary to achieve a better outcome for the employees than what would be achieved under the modern award.

Simford Engineering Services 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