DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
v
Cushman & Wakefield Facilities Services (Aust) Pty Ltd
(B2021/758)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 2 SEPTEMBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Cushman & Wakefield Facilities Services (Aust) 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 Cushman & Wakefield Facilities Services (Aust) Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 2 September 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Erin Hennessy 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 PR733489.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case between the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Cushman & Wakefield Facilities Services (Aust) Pty Ltd came before the Fair Work Commission. The union sought to conduct a ballot of employees for a proposed protected industrial action. Cushman & Wakefield contested the union's eligibility and the procedural fairness of the ballot.

The central legal issue was whether the union had the requisite support of employees to conduct a ballot. Additionally, the court had to determine if the union had followed proper procedures in proposing the ballot, as required by the Fair Work Act. The company argued that the union had not demonstrated sufficient employee support and had failed to follow procedural requirements.

The Fair Work Commission found in favour of the union, concluding that it had demonstrated sufficient support among employees and had followed proper procedures. The commission emphasised that the union had acted within the bounds of the law in proposing the ballot, and the company's objections were not substantiated. The union was thus permitted to proceed with the ballot.

The commission ordered that the union could conduct the proposed ballot of employees, as it had met the statutory requirements. The union's procedural fairness in proposing the ballot was upheld, and the company's objections were dismissed.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Cushman & Wakefield Facilities Services (Aust) 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