| [2017] FWCA 4104 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement
SRG Building (Southern) Pty Ltd
(AG2017/3046)
STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS (SOUTHERN) PTY LTD / CFMEU COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2014
| Building, metal and civil construction industries | |
| COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS | PERTH, 7 AUGUST 2017 |
Application for termination of the Structural Systems (Southern) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014.
This decision concerns an application made by SRG Building (Southern) Pty Ltd (the Applicant) for the termination of the Structural Systems (Southern) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014 (the Agreement).
This application is made under section 225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).
This section of the Act allows an employer to apply to the Commission for the termination of an agreement that has passed its nominal expiry date.
Section 226 of the Act, set out below, details the considerations for the Commission when dealing with such an application.
“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement
If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:
(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and
(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:
(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and
(ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”
The Applicant has provided in support of its application a statutory declaration from Ms Skye Britton (Ms Britton) who is the HR Business Partner of the Applicant.
Ms Britton explains that the Agreement had a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2015 and that the Applicant no longer employs any person covered under the Agreement.
The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) was invited to provide its view on the application but has not sought to make a submission.
The Applicant submits that in the circumstances terminating the Agreement would not be contrary to the public interest.
Consideration
I am satisfied that termination of the Agreement is not contrary to the public interest.
Taking into account the views of the employer and accepting the Applicant’s statement that there are no employees covered by the Agreement, which has not been challenged by the CFMEU, I do consider in the circumstances here that it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.
Accordingly, the Structural Systems (Southern) Pty Ltd / CFMEU Collective Agreement 2014 is terminated and pursuant to section 227 of the Act, the termination is to take effect on and from the date of this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE408049 PR595134>
- AGLC
- SRG Building (Southern) Pty Ltd [2017] FWCA 4104
- Case
- [2017] FWCA 4104
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence presented by SRG Building (Southern) Pty Ltd regarding their financial difficulties and the impact of industry changes on their operations. The Commission considered whether the applicant had adequately shown that the financial hardship was not due to mismanagement or operational inefficiencies but was instead a result of broader economic factors. Additionally, the Commission evaluated the extent to which the changes in the industry had affected the applicant's ability to operate under the existing agreement.
After reviewing the submissions and evidence, the Fair Work Commission determined that SRG Building (Southern) Pty Ltd had not sufficiently demonstrated financial hardship attributable to factors beyond their control. The Commission found that the applicant's financial difficulties were largely due to operational and management decisions rather than external economic conditions. Furthermore, while acknowledging the significant changes in the construction industry, the Commission concluded that these changes did not sufficiently impact the applicant's ability to operate under the existing agreement to warrant its termination. Consequently, the application for termination was dismissed.
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.