Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Kentz (Australia) Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2016] FWCFB 1501
•3 FEBRUARY 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Kentz (Australia) Pty Ltd [2016] FWCFB 1501
[2016] FWCFB 1501
3 FEBRUARY 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Fair Work Commission, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, represented by Mr J. M. O'Reilly, brought a complaint against Kentz (Australia) Pty Ltd, represented by Mr T. P. Dwyer, alleging that the company had engaged in prohibited conduct by dismissing employees who were on protected industrial action. The dispute arose out of an enterprise agreement and the National Employment Standards. The Commission was required to determine whether the dismissals were unlawful and if so, what remedy was appropriate.
The primary issue before the Commission was whether the dismissals were genuinely related to the employees' participation in protected industrial action, as prohibited by section 349 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission had to assess the evidence and arguments presented by both parties to ascertain whether the dismissals were a direct consequence of the employees' involvement in the protected action. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the company had a valid reason for the dismissals independent of the protected action.
In delivering its decision, the Commission carefully examined the evidence and submissions. It concluded that the dismissals were not genuinely related to the employees' participation in the protected industrial action. Instead, the Commission found that the dismissals were due to the employees' conduct, which included threatening and intimidating behaviour towards management. As a result, the dismissals were considered lawful, and the application was dismissed. The Commission did not order any reinstatement or compensation for the dismissed employees.
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application brought by the union on behalf of the dismissed employees. No orders for reinstatement or compensation were made in favour of the applicants.
The primary issue before the Commission was whether the dismissals were genuinely related to the employees' participation in protected industrial action, as prohibited by section 349 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission had to assess the evidence and arguments presented by both parties to ascertain whether the dismissals were a direct consequence of the employees' involvement in the protected action. Additionally, the Commission needed to consider whether the company had a valid reason for the dismissals independent of the protected action.
In delivering its decision, the Commission carefully examined the evidence and submissions. It concluded that the dismissals were not genuinely related to the employees' participation in the protected industrial action. Instead, the Commission found that the dismissals were due to the employees' conduct, which included threatening and intimidating behaviour towards management. As a result, the dismissals were considered lawful, and the application was dismissed. The Commission did not order any reinstatement or compensation for the dismissed employees.
The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application brought by the union on behalf of the dismissed employees. No orders for reinstatement or compensation were made in favour of the applicants.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Collective Bargaining
-
Enterprise Agreement
-
National Employment Standards
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Kentz (Australia) Pty Ltd [2016] FWC 669
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Cases Cited
12
Statutory Material Cited
0
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v The Australian Industrial Relations Commission
[2001] HCA 16