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 T/A O-I Melbourne
(B2016/1006)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 16 SEPTEMBER 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of ACI Operations Pty Ltd T/A O-I Melbourne.

[1] This is an application by 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 T/A O-I Melbourne (the Respondent).

[2] On 15 September 2016 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 S Diston of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent Company and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent Company, 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 PR585490.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission was asked to consider an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia to hold a ballot of employees of ACI Operations Pty Ltd, trading as O-I Melbourne, to ascertain whether the employees were in favour of protected action. The union sought the ballot in order to determine whether the employees would support protected action to be taken in pursuit of an enterprise agreement. The union submitted that the ballot was necessary to determine the employees’ views on the proposed action. ACI Operations opposed the application on the basis that the union had not complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The central issue before the Commission was whether the union had complied with the statutory requirements for a ballot to be held. The Commission noted that the union had not provided sufficient details in the ballot paper to enable the employees to make an informed decision on whether to support the proposed protected action. The union had also failed to provide the employer with the ballot paper in accordance with the statutory requirements. The Commission concluded that the union had not complied with the requirements of the Act and dismissed the application. The Commission made no orders as the application had been dismissed.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v ACI Operations Pty Ltd T/A O-I Melbourne

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established