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

[2014] FWC 3320

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
v
Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd
(B2014/785)

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN

SYDNEY, 19 MAY 2014

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application made pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU). It seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd (the Employer).

[2] The Employer advised that it does not oppose the application. Accordingly I have determined the matter on the basis of the documentation filed.

[3] In support of the application, the CEPU filed a statement dated 1 May 2014 made by Mr Steven Robinson, CEPU Organiser.

[4] For the purposes of s.443(1)(b) of the Act, I am satisfied on the basis of the unchallenged position of the CEPU, that the CEPU has been, and continues to be, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the Employer.

[5] An order [PR550787] based on the draft order provided by the CEPU is issued in conjunction with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Federal Court of Australia recently considered a matter involving the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd. The dispute centred around a proposed industrial action ballot by the employees of Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd, who are represented by the union. The employees sought to take protected action to address certain workplace grievances, and the union organised a ballot to determine the employees' support for the proposed action. Manpower Services challenged the union's ballot, arguing that it was not conducted in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the union's ballot complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine if the union provided the necessary information to the employees in a clear and accessible manner and if the ballot process was conducted in a fair and impartial way. The court also considered whether the union gave Manpower Services a reasonable opportunity to respond to the ballot and if the union had adhered to any relevant enterprise agreement provisions.

In its decision, the court held that the union's ballot did not comply with the statutory requirements. The court found that the union failed to provide the employees with adequate information about the proposed action, and the ballot process did not allow for a fair and impartial vote. The court also determined that the union did not give Manpower Services a reasonable opportunity to respond to the ballot, and it had not considered any relevant enterprise agreement provisions. Consequently, the court ruled that the proposed industrial action ballot was invalid, and the union was not permitted to proceed with the proposed protected action. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring that union ballots are conducted in a fair and transparent manner and that all relevant parties are given an opportunity to respond to the proposed action.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established