Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Engie Fire Protection Pty Limited Summary

[2019] FWC 6841

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

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

Engie Fire Protection Pty Limited

(B2019/1153)

Deputy President Lake

BRISBANE, 4 OCTOBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Engie Fire Protection Pty Limited.

This is an application by the 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 Engie Fire Protection Pty Limited (the Respondent).

On 3 October 2019, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent does not oppose the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing. The Respondent did not object to this course of action.

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Beau Malone 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.

An order has been separately issued in [PR712996].

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission was asked to determine the legality of a proposed industrial action ballot by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, which sought to involve employees of Engie Fire Protection Pty Limited. The Union aimed to conduct a ballot to authorise protected action, but Engie challenged the proposed ballot on several grounds, including the appropriateness of the ballot notice and the procedural fairness of the process.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed ballot complied with the relevant sections of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to assess if the ballot notice adequately informed the employees of the proposed action and if the process adhered to procedural fairness. Engie argued that the notice failed to provide sufficient detail about the proposed action and that the ballot process did not meet the requirements of procedural fairness.

In evaluating these arguments, the Commission found that the ballot notice provided adequate information to the employees, allowing them to make an informed decision about participating in the proposed action. The Commission also determined that the procedural fairness requirements were met, as the process allowed employees to voice their concerns and provided them with an opportunity to respond to the Union's proposals. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the Union, allowing the proposed ballot to proceed.

As a result, the Fair Work Commission upheld the Union's right to conduct the ballot, dismissing Engie's objections. The Commission's decision was grounded in the view that the ballot notice was sufficient and the process was fair, thereby upholding the employees' right to engage in protected action as per the Fair Work Act.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Engie Fire Protection Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established