Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Equans Electrical and Communications Pty Ltd

Case [2023] FWC 684
[2023] FWC 684

FAIR WORK COMMISSION
DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

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

Equans Electrical and Communications Pty Ltd

(B2023/263)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 22 MARCH 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Equans Electrical and Communications 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 Equans Electrical and Communications Pty Ltd (Respondent).

  1. On 21 March 2023, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

  1. In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

  1. On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Christopher James Pappas of the Applicant declared on 20 March 2023, 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.

  1. An Order has been separately issued in PR760491.


VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR760492>

Details
AGLC
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Equans Electrical and Communications Pty Ltd [2023] FWC 684
Case
[2023] FWC 684
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission was asked to decide on an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia to hold a protected action ballot for certain employees of Equans Electrical and Communications Pty Ltd. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and the employer did not oppose the application. The Vice President decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing. The applicant had provided a statutory declaration outlining the bargaining process and that it had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer.

The key legal issue for the court to decide was whether the applicant had met the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009, including the notification time for the proposed agreement. The court had to consider the material provided, including the statutory declaration, to determine whether the applicant had taken the necessary steps in bargaining with the employer and whether there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement. The court had to ensure that the applicant had met all the requirements before granting the protected action ballot order.

The Vice President was satisfied that the applicant had met the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Vice President found that the applicant had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer and that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement. The Vice President was also satisfied that the applicant had taken the necessary steps in bargaining with the employer. Therefore, the Vice President decided to grant the protected action ballot order.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission granted the application for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Equans Electrical and Communications Pty Ltd. The Vice President found that the applicant had met all the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009, including the notification time for the proposed agreement. The Vice President was satisfied that the applicant had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer and that the necessary steps in bargaining had been taken. An Order was separately issued in PR760491.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.