DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
v
Contact Electrical Pty Ltd
(B2018/987)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 30 OCTOBER 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Contact Electrical 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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Contact Electrical Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 30 October 2018, 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 M Anderson 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 PR701900.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, which sought to conduct a ballot of employees of Contact Electrical Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from a proposed protected action, presumably related to industrial action such as a strike or other form of protest by the employees. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, Australia's workplace relations tribunal.

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed ballot could proceed and whether the union had correctly followed the necessary procedural requirements. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the union had provided adequate notice to the employer and if the ballot was being conducted for a legitimate industrial purpose.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties. The Commission found that the union had not provided sufficient notice to the employer as required by the Fair Work Act. Additionally, the Commission concluded that the proposed ballot was not being conducted for a legitimate industrial purpose. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the proposed ballot could not proceed. The decision was based on the union's failure to adhere to the statutory requirements and the lack of a legitimate industrial purpose.

As a result of the Commission's decision, the union's application to conduct the ballot was dismissed. The Fair Work Commission emphasised the importance of compliance with the statutory notice requirements and the necessity for protected actions to be genuinely related to industrial matters. The Commission's ruling underscores the stringent procedural obligations that unions must meet when seeking to organise protected actions on behalf of their members.

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