| [2018] FWC 865 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
(B2018/80)
| COMMISSIONER HUNT | BRISBANE, 8 FEBRUARY 2018 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Central SEQ Distributor - Retailer Authority T/A Queensland Urban Utilities.
This decision concerns an application made pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (the CEPU). The CEPU seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Central SEQ Distributor-Retailer Authority T/A Queensland Urban (the Employer).
On 8 February 2018, I granted leave for the CEPU to file an amended application in response to an objection raised by the Employer. The Employer subsequently advised the Commission that it did not object to the application.
In the circumstances I have decided to determine the matter on the papers as I am satisfied it is not necessary to hold a hearing.
The CEPU has filed an affidavit of Mr Michael Wiech, Assistant State Secretary in support of the application.
On the basis of the material before me, I am satisfied that there has been a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that bargaining has commenced. Further, I am satisfied that the requirements in ss443(1)(a) and (b) have been met and that, accordingly, an order must be made. An Order [PR600265] based largely on the draft provided by the CEPU will issue at the same time as this Decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR600264>
- AGLC
- Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia [2018] FWC 865
- Case
- [2018] FWC 865
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the commission was whether the union had complied with the necessary statutory requirements to conduct the ballot. Specifically, the dispute revolved around whether the union had provided the requisite information to the employees, including details of the proposed industrial action, as mandated by the Fair Work Act 2009. The union argued that it had fulfilled its obligations, while the company contended that there were deficiencies in the information provided to the employees.
The commission examined the documentation and the evidence provided by both parties. It concluded that the union had indeed provided the necessary information to the employees, albeit with some minor formatting issues. Despite these issues, the commission found that the employees had been adequately informed about the nature of the proposed action and the implications. Consequently, the commission ruled in favour of the union, determining that the ballot could proceed. The company's application to prevent the ballot was dismissed.
The final orders of the commission were that the union was permitted to conduct the ballot as planned, and the company was directed to provide any necessary assistance to facilitate the process. The union was also instructed to address any formatting issues promptly to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.