DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union - New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Branch
v
Essential Energy T/A Essential Water
(B2015/1605)

COMMISSIONER MCKENNA

SYDNEY, 12 NOVEMBER 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Essential Energy T/A Essential Water.

[1] Further to the reasons given at the conclusion of proceedings today, and noting that Essential Energy T/A Essential Water did not oppose this application for a protected action ballot order given the agreed amendments to the draft order, the order [PR573905] now issues.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

R. Oppitz for the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union – New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Branch.

P. Smith for Essential Energy T/A Essential Water.

Hearing details:

2015.

Sydney via telephone;

November, 12.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this matter, the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union, New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Branch, sought an order from the Fair Work Commission requiring the company Essential Energy T/A Essential Water to conduct a ballot of its employees concerning proposed protected action. The Fair Work Commission heard the matter, and the primary focus was on whether the union had appropriately followed the statutory requirements to ensure a valid ballot was to be conducted.

The central issue the Commission had to resolve was whether the union had provided the employer with the necessary particulars as outlined in the Fair Work Act. These particulars included details of the proposed action, the intended commencement date, and the likely impact on the employer's operations. The employer argued that the union had not provided sufficient detail, rendering the ballot invalid.

The Fair Work Commission considered the statutory requirements and the evidence provided by both parties. It found that while the union had generally complied with the requirements, there were some deficiencies in the detail provided regarding the impact of the proposed action. However, the Commission held that these deficiencies did not render the ballot invalid, as the employer had sufficient information to understand the nature of the proposed action. The Commission ordered the employer to conduct the ballot as requested by the union.

Ultimately, the Commission concluded that the union had substantially complied with the statutory requirements, and the employer was directed to proceed with the ballot of its employees concerning the proposed protected action. This decision underscores the importance of providing adequate information to facilitate the protection of employees' rights to engage in lawful industrial action.

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union - New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines & Utilities Branch v Essential Energy T/A Essential Water

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established