allows a worker who is a negotiator not to attend meetings or discuss issues related to the terms of the proposed agreement with colleagues; Fair Work Commission publishes enterprise agreements on this website. Ditchfield Mining`s Full Bench mining also looked at the extent to which a declaration should be made with a comparison between an agreement and a distinction for the workers concerned: the Fair Labour Commission can also help employers and workers negotiating its “New Approaches” program. Learn more about the new approaches on the Fair Labour Commission website. “The obligation in points 180 (5) to take all appropriate measures to explain to the workers concerned the terms of an enterprise agreement and the effect of these conditions is an important function of the contracting system defined in Part 2 to 4 of the Act. Its obvious objective, given its role in determining whether workers who should vote in favour of an agreement that actually approved the agreement, ensure that workers are informed as widely as possible of the terms and effects of a proposed enterprise agreement before voting on the approval of the agreement. Compliance with the employer`s commitment under S.180 (5) should enable workers to know what they are called upon to do and to understand how their wages and working conditions could have an impact by voting in favour of an agreement. In motivating its decision, the ACF indicated that it would critically examine an employer`s actions prior to a vote to determine whether “all appropriate measures” were actually taken to explain to employees the terms and effects of a proposed enterprise agreement. Employers who do not take such measures may find in the future that the Fair Work Commission (FWC) will reject the proposed agreement. The information and instruments are available on the Commission`s website to support an agreement. Visit an agreement for more details. Judge Flick followed the CFMEU decision against John Holland Pty Ltd (2015) 228 FCR 297 (CFMEU/John Holland) and found that an employer who entered into an enterprise agreement with a small group of workers in which the agreement has the potential to cover a much larger number of workers in the future was not necessarily inappropriate. He found that the three staff members who had voted in the case were “fairly elected.”  However, the true meaning of the appeal decision lies in the consideration of an earlier decision by Full Bench, KCL Industries Ltd  FWCFB 3048 (KCL) which requires workers to have a “sufficient share” in a proposed agreement and a “moral authority” to approve it. At the same time, unions and the federal opposition are increasingly calling for legislative reform in this area.  The CFMEU/One Key decision confirms that enterprise agreements of this type will remain a controversial aspect of the current industrial relations system.