Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Menco Electrical & Data (SA) Pty Ltd T/A Menco Electrical & Data

Case [2022] FWC 1906


[2022] FWC 1906

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

Menco Electrical & Data (SA) Pty Ltd T/A Menco Electrical & Data

(B2022/695)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 20 JULY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Menco Electrical & Data (SA) Pty Ltd T/A Menco Electrical & Data.

  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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Menco Electrical & Data (SA) Pty Ltd T/A Menco Electrical & Data (the Respondent).

  1. The Respondent did not take up any of the opportunities it was given to comment on 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 declaration of Mr Alex Capper 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.

  1. The Applicant also sought that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) be the ballot agent for the protected action ballot. This course was not opposed by the Respondent. The person proposed in the application as the protected action ballot agent is Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd trading as CiVS (CiVS). Mr Michael M Michael, the Managing Director of CiVs has provided a statutory declaration setting out that he would carry out the functions of the protected ballot agent for CiVS, and that he has relevant experience in conducting protected action ballots. I am satisfied that CiVS is a fit and proper person to conduct the ballot. I am also satisfied that Mr Michael and CiVS are capable of ensuring the secrecy and security of the votes and of conducting the ballot expeditiously. CiVs has agreed to be the protected action ballot agent and Mr Michael and CiVS are bound to comply with the Privacy Act 1998 with respect to the handling of the information relating to the protected action ballot.

  1. Therefore I appoint CiVS as the protected action ballot agent.

  1. An order has been separately issued in PR743978.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR743977>

Details
AGLC
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Menco Electrical & Data (SA) Pty Ltd T/A Menco Electrical & Data [2022] FWC 1906
Case
[2022] FWC 1906
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Menco Electrical & Data (SA) Pty Ltd T/A Menco Electrical & Data was heard by the Fair Work Commission. The union sought an order for a protected action ballot, which would allow employees of the respondent company to vote on proposed industrial action. The company did not respond to invitations to comment on the application, leading to the decision being made on the available documentation.

The central legal issue was whether the union had fulfilled the statutory requirements to hold a protected action ballot. The union needed to demonstrate that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that it had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the respondent. The union also needed to propose a suitable ballot agent who could ensure the secrecy and security of the votes.

The Fair Work Commission determined that the union had met the requirements for a protected action ballot. The union's declaration, along with other material, demonstrated that it had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the respondent. The proposed ballot agent, Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd trading as CiVS, was deemed fit and proper to conduct the ballot. The company did not oppose the appointment of this agent.

As a result, the Commission ordered that CiVS be appointed as the ballot agent and authorised the union to conduct the protected action ballot. This decision was made without a hearing, given the respondent's lack of participation in the process.

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.