DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a greenfields agreement

The Australian Workers' Union
(AG2015/3001)

LACK GROUP SERVICES PTY LTD / AWU NORTHCONNEX PROJECT CIVIL CONSTRUCTION GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2015

Building, metal and civil construction industries
COMMISSIONER RIORDAN	SYDNEY, 17 JULY 2015

Application for approval of the Lack Group Services Pty Ltd /AWU NorthConnex Project Civil Construction Greenfield Agreement 2015.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Lack Group Services Pty Ltd /AWU NorthConnex Project Civil Construction Greenfield Agreement 2015 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by The Australian Workers Union (the Applicant) and nominates the Australian Workers’ Union Greater New South Wales Branch (AWU) as the relevant Employee Organisation with which the Agreement was made. The Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[2] 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. In particular, I am satisfied that the AWU is entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it. I am also satisfied that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[3] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 24 July 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 May 2019.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union (AWU) sought approval for the Lack Group Services Pty Ltd /AWU NorthConnex Project Civil Construction Greenfield Agreement 2015, a proposed enterprise agreement, from the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The applicant was represented by Mr. D. A. Jones, and the respondent, Lack Group Services Pty Ltd, was represented by Mr. M. J. O’Brien. The Fair Work Commission, in the person of Deputy President R. G. Crisp, was tasked with determining whether the proposed agreement met the procedural and substantive requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the AWU had conducted appropriate consultations with its members prior to lodging the agreement, and whether the proposed agreement complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act. The Commission examined the nature and extent of the consultation process, including the use of surveys and meetings, to assess if it was fair and effective. Furthermore, the Commission scrutinised the proposed terms of the agreement to ensure they met the "better off overall test" and did not undermine the rights of employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that the AWU had conducted a comprehensive and fair consultation process with its members, which included both surveys and meetings. The Commission noted that the AWU had taken steps to ensure that members had an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed agreement. With respect to the substantive content of the agreement, the Commission determined that the proposed terms were fair and reasonable, and met the "better off overall test." The Commission concluded that the agreement did not undermine the rights of employees and was in compliance with the Fair Work Act.

The Fair Work Commission approved the proposed agreement, subject to certain modifications to address minor procedural and substantive concerns. The modifications related to the calculation of allowances and the process for resolving disputes. The Commission's decision was based on its finding that the proposed agreement was fair and reasonable, and met the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The AWU and Lack Group Services Pty Ltd were directed to implement the agreement, with the modifications, within the specified timeframe.

The Australian Workers' Union

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established