DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
v
Broadspectrum (Australia) Pty Ltd
(B2020/742)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 24 NOVEMBER 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Broadspectrum (Australia) Pty Ltd

[1] This is an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Broadspectrum (Australia) Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 23 November 2020, 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 David Hayes of the Applicant declared on 20 November 2020, 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 PR724839.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission heard a case involving the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Broadspectrum (Australia) Pty Ltd. The dispute centred around the union's proposed ballot of its members employed by Broadspectrum to authorise protected action, specifically a strike. The company sought to prevent the ballot, arguing it would cause significant operational disruption and financial loss. The union, on the other hand, maintained that the ballot was necessary to empower its members to take lawful industrial action in pursuit of their bargaining objectives.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the proposed ballot would cause undue hardship to Broadspectrum, and if the union had followed the necessary procedural steps to conduct the ballot. The Commission had to consider the potential impact of the proposed industrial action on Broadspectrum's business operations and whether the union had acted in accordance with the relevant legislative and regulatory frameworks. Furthermore, the Commission needed to assess whether the proposed ballot was genuinely related to the union's industrial objectives and if it was necessary for the union to proceed with the ballot.

After examining the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the Commission concluded that the proposed ballot would cause significant hardship to Broadspectrum, particularly in terms of operational disruption and financial loss. The Commission found that the union had not adequately demonstrated that the ballot was necessary to achieve its industrial objectives or that it had taken all reasonable steps to avoid the need for protected action. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the union's proposed ballot should not proceed. The Commission also emphasised the importance of both parties engaging in good faith negotiations to resolve their disputes and avoid unnecessary industrial action.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed ballot of Broadspectrum employees by the union be disallowed. The Commission directed both parties to engage in further negotiations in good faith to resolve their disputes and avoid any further industrial action. The decision highlights the need for unions and employers to carefully consider the potential consequences of proposed industrial action and to exhaust all available avenues for resolving disputes before resorting to protected action.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Broadspectrum (Australia) 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