Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v National Fire Solutions Pty Ltd
[2012] FWA 5800
•9 JULY 2012
[2012] FWA 5800 |
|
REASONS FOR 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
National Fire Solutions Pty Ltd
(B2012/1081)
COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN | PERTH, 9 JULY 2012 |
Proposed protected action ballot by employees of National Fire Solutions Pty Ltd.
[1] On 4 July 2012, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (“the Applicant” or “CEPU”) made application to Fair Work Australia (FWA) for a Protected Action Ballot Order pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the FW Act”).
[2] The employees to be balloted are employed by National Fire Solutions Pty Ltd (“the Employer”) and are represented by the CEPU in bargaining for a replacement enterprise agreement to the National Fire Solutions (WA) Pty Ltd Fire Alarms Contracting Division, Major Commercial Enterprise Agreement 2009 and the National Fire Solutions (WA) Pty Ltd Fire Alarms Service and Minor Works Division, Major Commercial Enterprise Agreement 2009 (“the Agreements”).
[3] The nominal expiry dates of the Agreements are 30 June 2012.
[4] The application was heard on 6 July 2012. At the conclusion of the hearing, I made a determination that the CEPU had satisfied the provisions of the FW Act and an Order should issue (PR526053). These are the written reasons for issuing the Order.
[5] At the hearing, the CEPU was represented by Ms N Ireland, Industrial Officer. The Employer did not attend the hearing.
APPLICANT’S CASE
[6] The Applicant’s representative requested, in view of its recency, that the evidence presented in the previous application, involving the same parties (B2012/859), be part of the evidence in these proceedings; I agreed with that request.
[7] Ms Ireland provided the Tribunal with further bargaining discussions since the previous hearing on 11 June 2012.
[8] The Applicant submitted that the procedural requirements of the FW Act had been met and the CEPU has been, and continues to be, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Employer.
EMPLOYER’S POSITION
[9] The Employer’s representative advised the Tribunal by email that it “would not be attending or opposing this application”.
CONCLUSION
[1] I was satisfied that the procedural requirements in sections 437, 438 and 440 have been met.
[2] Having considered the relevant provisions of the FW Act, the CEPU submission, evidence of the Applicant and the Employer’s position in not opposing the application, I determined that the Applicant has been and is genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Employer; on these grounds I issued Order PR526053 on 6 July 2012.
COMMISSIONER
Appearances:
Ms N Ireland, for the Applicant.
No appearance or representation by or on behalf of the Respondent.
Hearing details:
2012:
Perth,
6 July.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR526080>
0
0
0