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
v
LCE Queensland Pty Ltd
(B2017/864)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 26 SEPTEMBER 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of LCE Queensland 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 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of LCE Queensland Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 26 September 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr K McKenzie 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 PR596396.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties in this case were the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and LCE Queensland Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on a proposed industrial action ballot by the employees of LCE Queensland Pty Ltd, which the union intended to conduct. The Fair Work Commission was the court that heard this matter.

The primary legal issues that the court needed to decide were whether the union had the right to conduct the proposed protected action ballot and if the company had the right to prevent it. The court also needed to determine whether the proposed action would cause undue hardship to the company and its employees.

The Fair Work Commission found that the union had the right to conduct the ballot as it was a protected industrial action. However, the court also found that the company had the right to prevent the ballot if it could prove that it would cause undue hardship to the company and its employees. The commission determined that the company had not provided sufficient evidence to prove that the proposed action would cause undue hardship. The commission further held that the company's operations would not be significantly impacted by the proposed action. Therefore, the union was allowed to conduct the ballot.

The final orders of the court were that the union was permitted to conduct the proposed protected action ballot of the employees of LCE Queensland Pty Ltd. The company was also ordered to facilitate the conduct of the ballot by providing necessary information and resources. The company was further ordered to refrain from taking any action that would interfere with the union's right to conduct the ballot.

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