Veolia Environmental Services Summary

[2014] FWCA 2635

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

Veolia Environmental Services
(AG2014/4101)

VEOLIA REFRACTORIES (VICTORIA) AND CFMEU AGREEMENT 2013 - 2017

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT WATSON	MELBOURNE, 22 APRIL 2014

Application for approval of the Veolia Refractories (Victoria) and CFMEU Agreement 2013 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Veolia Refractories (Victoria) and CFMEU Agreement 2013 - 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Veolia Environmental Services. 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 Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2), I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54, will operate from 29 April 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 September 2017.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in the Veolia Environmental Services case were Veolia Environmental Services, the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU), and the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The dispute revolved around the approval of a proposed enterprise agreement between Veolia and the CFMU. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the agreement complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether it was in the best interests of the employees.

The Commission had to determine whether the agreement met the procedural requirements set out in the Act, including whether proper consultation had occurred and whether the agreement was appropriately certified. The Commission also needed to consider whether the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, taking into account the interests of the employees, the employer, and the broader community. The Commission had to balance the need for a fair and effective agreement with the need to avoid undue interference with the parties' bargaining process.

After carefully considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission found that the agreement complied with the procedural requirements of the Act and was appropriately certified. The Commission also found that the agreement was fair and reasonable, taking into account the interests of all parties. The Commission approved the agreement, subject to certain modifications to address minor concerns about the clarity of some provisions. The decision was based on the Commission's finding that the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions of employment, while also recognising the need for a flexible and efficient workforce. The final orders of the Commission included the approval of the agreement, subject to the modifications identified in the decision.

Veolia Environmental Services

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established