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
v
ACI Operations Pty Ltd
(B2017/65)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 18 JANUARY 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of ACI Operations Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of 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 ACI Operations Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 17 January 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent 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 Mr P Ong of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and is, 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 PR589481.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia brought a claim against ACI Operations Pty Ltd. The Union sought to conduct a ballot of employees regarding potential industrial action. The dispute centred on the procedural fairness of the company's response to the Union's request for a ballot. The Union argued that the company had not properly considered its request and had failed to provide adequate reasons for its decision.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the company's response to the Union's request for a ballot was procedurally fair and compliant with the relevant legislative provisions. The Commission needed to determine if the company had adequately considered the Union's request and whether it had provided sufficient reasons for its decision. The Union contended that the company's response was arbitrary and did not address the merits of the request.

In its decision, the Commission found that the company had not provided a fair and adequate response to the Union's request for a ballot. The Commission noted that the company's response was not reasoned and did not engage with the Union's request in a manner consistent with procedural fairness. The Commission emphasised the importance of providing clear and reasoned responses to Union requests for ballots to ensure that the process is transparent and fair. The Commission ordered the company to conduct a ballot as requested by the Union.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v ACI Operations 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