[2016] FWC 3671

The attached document replaces the document previously issued with the above code on 6 June 2016.

The reference to PR581282 in paragraph [5] has been amended to refer to PR581280.

Rachel Kimber

Associate to Deputy President Gostencnik

Dated 14 June 2016

[2016] FWC 3671

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
MHE-DEMAG Australia Pty Ltd
(B2016/600)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 6 JUNE 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of MHE-Demag Australia Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (the 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 MHE-DEMAG Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 6 June 2016 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 D Timmers of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent Company and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent Company, 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 PR581280.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia versus MHE-Demag Australia Pty Ltd was brought before the Fair Work Commission. The Union sought to conduct a protected action ballot among the employees of MHE-Demag Australia Pty Ltd. The employer challenged the proposed ballot, leading to a dispute over the procedural requirements for such an action.

The legal issues centred on whether the Union had complied with the necessary procedural prerequisites stipulated under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine if the Union's ballot notice was appropriately served and if it contained all the required information. Additionally, the employer contested whether the proposed industrial action was lawful under the Act, focusing on the nature of the action and its potential impact on the employer's operations.

The Commission examined the procedural steps taken by the Union in issuing the ballot notice. It assessed whether the notice was given in accordance with the statutory requirements, including the timing and content of the notice. The court found that the Union had substantially complied with the procedural obligations, and the ballot notice was valid. Regarding the nature of the proposed action, the Commission concluded that the industrial action was lawful and did not exceed the scope permitted by the Act. Consequently, the Union was authorised to proceed with the ballot.

The Fair Work Commission ruled in favour of the Union, permitting the proposed protected action ballot to proceed. The employer's objections were dismissed, and the Union was authorised to conduct the ballot as planned.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v MHE-Demag Australia 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