| [2022] FWC 1895 |
| 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
Kone Elevators Pty Ltd T/A Kone
(B2022/704)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY | MELBOURNE, 19 JULY 2022 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of KONE Elevators Pty Ltd
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 KONE Elevators Pty Ltd (the Respondent).
On 19 July 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.
In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.
On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Ms Chelsea Hill 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 PR743952.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR743951>
- AGLC
- Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Kone Elevators Pty Ltd T/A Kone [2022] FWC 1895
- Case
- [2022] FWC 1895
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the union had fulfilled the conditions set forth in section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for conducting a ballot of its members for protected industrial action. The court had to consider the union's declaration, which outlined the steps taken in bargaining with the employer, and whether the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employer. Additionally, the court needed to confirm if the notification period in relation to the proposed agreement had been met, as required by section 443(1) of the Act.
The Deputy President found that the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employer, as evidenced by the declaration of Ms Chelsea Hill. Furthermore, the court was satisfied that the notification period in relation to the proposed agreement had been met, and that the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act were fulfilled. Consequently, the Deputy President determined that the application for a ballot order should be granted.
An order has been separately issued in PR743952, authorising the union to conduct a ballot of its members employed by Kone Elevators Pty Ltd for protected industrial action. This decision enables the union to proceed with the ballot, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the order.
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.