DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia – Plumbing Division Queensland Divisional Branch
v
Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd
(B2019/438)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

SYDNEY, 5 JUNE 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia – Plumbing Division Queensland Divisional Branch (CEPU) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 5 June 2019, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Michael Wiech of the CEPU declared on 3 June 2019, setting out the steps taken by them in bargaining with the Respondent and that they have been, and are, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] An Order has been separately issued in PR709017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The respondents, the Plumbing Division Queensland Divisional Branch of the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, sought an order that the first respondent be prohibited from taking certain industrial action against it. The applicants were employees of the first respondent, Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd, who intended to vote on whether to take protected action in response to a pay dispute. The dispute was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the applicants had standing to apply for the injunction, and if the first respondent's proposed industrial action was protected action within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009. The applicants argued that they had standing because they would be directly affected by the industrial action. The first respondent argued that the applicants did not have standing, and that the proposed action was not protected action because it related to an enterprise agreement that was in operation and not terminated.

The court found that the applicants did have standing to apply for the injunction. It found that the applicants would be directly affected by the industrial action, as it would impact their wages and conditions of employment. The court also found that the proposed action was protected action because it related to an enterprise agreement that was in operation and not terminated. The court noted that the applicants had not raised any objections to the proposed action on the basis that it was not protected action, and that the first respondent had a genuine belief that the proposed action was protected action.

The court made an order that the first respondent be prohibited from taking the proposed industrial action. The order was made on the basis that the applicants had standing to apply for the injunction, and that the proposed action was protected action. The court noted that the order was not a determination of the merits of the pay dispute between the applicants and the first respondent, and that it was not an order that the applicants were entitled to any particular outcome in relation to their wages and conditions of employment.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia - Plumbing Division Queensland Divisional Branch v Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established