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
Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino
(B2019/723)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 3 SEPTEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino.

[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 Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino (Respondent).

[2] On 3 September 2019, 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 R Vaughan 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 PR711964

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (the Union) sought an order from the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) for a protected action ballot of employees of Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino (the Employer). The Union's application was made under section 233 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Employer opposed the Union's application. The Union submitted that it was appropriate to hold a ballot of the employees in order to determine whether the employees wished to take protected action in relation to enterprise negotiations. The Employer opposed the Union's application on the basis that the Union did not have a genuine intention to hold a ballot of the employees.

The primary issue before the Commission was whether the Union had a genuine intention to hold a ballot of the employees in accordance with section 233 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Union's application was made on 27 August 2019 and was subsequently amended on 16 September 2019. The Union was required to provide evidence of its intention to hold a ballot in accordance with section 233(1)(a) of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission considered that it was necessary to consider the circumstances in which the Union made its application and the manner in which the Union sought to amend its application. The Commission concluded that the Union did not have a genuine intention to hold a ballot of the employees.

Accordingly, the Commission dismissed the Union's application. The Union's application for a protected action ballot was dismissed. The Union was ordered to pay the Employer's costs of and incidental to the proceeding in the amount of $2,500.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Crown Melbourne Limited T/A Crown Casino

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established