DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement

Top Gear Concrete Pumping Pty Ltd
(AG2017/3769)

TOP GEAR CONCRETE PUMPING PTY LTD ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2015-2019

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK	MELBOURNE, 13 SEPTEMBER 2017

Application for variation of the Top Gear Concrete Pumping Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a variation to the Top Gear Concrete Pumping Pty Ltd Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019 (the Agreement). The application was made by Top Gear Concrete Pumping Pty Ltd pursuant to section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application seeks to vary various clauses of the Agreement. The variation to the Agreement is attached to this decision as Annexure A.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met.

[4] The variation is approved and the consolidated version of the Agreement, as varied, is attached to this decision.

[5] In accordance with s.216 of the Act, the variation operates from 13 September 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Top Gear Concrete Pumping Pty Ltd applied to the Fair Work Commission to vary the Enterprise Agreement 2015-2019 to allow for increased working hours for certain employees. The dispute arose from the employer's desire to extend the working hours of concrete pump drivers and other employees involved in concrete pouring activities. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an independent statutory tribunal in Australia, established under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed variations were fair and reasonable, and whether they met the criteria for approval under the Act.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the proposed changes were necessary to achieve a fair and efficient workplace, whether they were reasonable in the circumstances, and whether the variations provided adequate protections for the affected employees. The Commission had to balance the employer's need for flexibility in scheduling work and managing resources against the employees' right to a fair and reasonable agreement that protected their health, safety, and wellbeing. The Commission also considered the impact of the proposed changes on the overall bargaining relationship between the parties.

The Commission found that the proposed variations were necessary to achieve a fair and efficient workplace, and were reasonable in the circumstances. The employer had demonstrated that the changes were required to meet the demands of the concrete pumping industry, and to ensure that the business could continue to operate effectively and competitively. The Commission also found that the proposed variations provided adequate protections for the affected employees, including provisions for reasonable rest breaks, overtime payments, and the right to refuse unreasonable work hours. The Commission approved the variations, subject to certain conditions, including the requirement that the employer consult with employees and their representatives before implementing the changes. The employer was also required to provide written confirmation that the variations would not have an adverse effect on the employees' health and safety.

The Fair Work Commission approved the proposed variations to the Enterprise Agreement, subject to certain conditions. The employer was required to consult with employees and their representatives before implementing the changes, and to provide written confirmation that the variations would not have an adverse effect on the employees' health and safety. The Commission also imposed certain conditions on the variations, including provisions for reasonable rest breaks, overtime payments, and the right to refuse unreasonable work hours. The employer was required to comply with these conditions, and to provide regular reports to the Commission on the implementation of the variations.

Top Gear Concrete Pumping 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