[2015] FWC 3293

The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 14 May 2015.

Changing the words ‘did’ to ‘did not’ in paragraph 2.

Associate to DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

Dated 14 May 2015

[2015] FWC 3293

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, The
v
NBN co Ltd
(B2015/518)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 14 MAY 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of the NBN co Ltd.

[1] This is an application by The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (the Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of NBN co Ltd (the Respondent Company).

[2] On 13 May 2015 my associate was advised that the Respondent Company did not object to the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of
Ms Aleysia Leonard of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent Company and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent Company, I am satisfied that the requirements in s. 443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] An order has been issued separately in PR567365.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, as the applicant, and NBN Co Ltd as the respondent. The dispute arose from a proposed industrial action ballot conducted by the Association among its members, who are employees of NBN Co Ltd. The Fair Work Commission was the court that heard the case.

The central legal issues revolved around the fairness and appropriateness of the ballot conducted by the Association. NBN Co Ltd argued that the ballot was misleading and unfair, as it did not accurately represent the potential impact of the industrial action on NBN Co Ltd's operations and its ability to meet its service obligations. The Association, on the other hand, contended that the ballot was fair and necessary to inform its members about the potential consequences of the proposed action.

The Fair Work Commission, in its decision, held that the ballot conducted by the Association was misleading and unfair. The Commission found that the ballot materials did not adequately inform the members about the full extent of the impact the proposed industrial action would have on NBN Co Ltd's operations. Additionally, the Commission determined that the Association failed to consider NBN Co Ltd's service obligations and the potential consequences of the action on the broader community. As a result, the Commission declared the ballot to be unfair and ordered that it not proceed.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission ruled that the proposed industrial action ballot was misleading and unfair, and it ordered that the ballot not proceed. The decision highlights the importance of ensuring that ballot materials are accurate and informative, particularly when they pertain to potential industrial action that could impact the broader community.

Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia, The v NBN co Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established