CEPU v ThyssenKrupp Elevator Australia Pty Ltd

The Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union (CEPU) brought proceedings against ThyssenKrupp Elevator Australia Pty Ltd in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute concerned allegations that ThyssenKrupp had breached section 342(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by taking adverse action against an employee, Mr. Mark Johnson, because he had exercised a workplace right. Specifically, the CEPU alleged that ThyssenKrupp terminated Mr. Johnson's employment due to his involvement in a protected industrial dispute and his participation in protected action.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether ThyssenKrupp had taken adverse action against Mr. Johnson, and if so, whether the reason for that action was Mr. Johnson's exercise of a workplace right, namely his participation in protected industrial action and a protected dispute. The Court was required to determine if the employer's actions were motivated by Mr. Johnson's protected industrial activities, which would constitute a contravention of the Fair Work Act.

Judge Jarrett found that ThyssenKrupp had indeed taken adverse action against Mr. Johnson by terminating his employment. The Court concluded that the reason for this adverse action was Mr. Johnson's involvement in protected industrial action and his participation in a protected dispute. The Court applied the principles of section 342(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act, which prohibits adverse action taken for a proscribed reason, including the exercise of a workplace right. The Court was satisfied that the evidence established the necessary causal link between Mr. Johnson's protected activities and the decision to terminate his employment.

The Court ordered that ThyssenKrupp Elevator Australia Pty Ltd had contravened section 342(1)(c) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The matter was adjourned for further submissions on the question of relief.