Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Rheem Australia Pty Limited Summary

[2013] FWC 1478

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
Rheem Australia Pty Limited
(B2013/56)

COMMISSIONER CARGILL

SYDNEY, 8 MARCH 2013

B2013/56 Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Rheem Australia Pty Limited .

[1] This is an application pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (theAct) by Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Rheem Australia Pty Limited (the respondent).

[2] My associate was informed by the respondent’s General Manager - Human Resources that the respondent had been served with the application and did not contest the application.

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

[4] I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, an order must be made. An order [PR534660] has issued in conjunction with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved a dispute between the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Rheem Australia Pty Limited. The Union sought to conduct a ballot of its members, who were employees of Rheem Australia, for the purpose of authorising protected action. Rheem Australia opposed the ballot, arguing that the Union had not provided sufficient information regarding the nature of the proposed action. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which was required to determine whether the Union had provided adequate information to its members to enable them to make an informed decision about whether to support the proposed action.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the Union had provided sufficient information to its members in relation to the proposed action, and whether the Commission should order Rheem Australia to facilitate the conduct of the ballot. The Union argued that it had provided adequate information to its members, while Rheem Australia contended that the information provided was insufficient. The Commission was required to consider the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 and any relevant case law in determining these issues.

In its decision, the Commission found that the Union had not provided sufficient information to its members in relation to the proposed action. The Commission noted that the Union's ballot papers did not provide adequate details about the nature of the proposed action, and that the information provided was insufficient to enable members to make an informed decision. The Commission also found that Rheem Australia had not objected to the conduct of the ballot on the basis of insufficient information, but rather on the basis that the ballot papers did not comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission concluded that, as the Union had not provided sufficient information to its members, it was not necessary to consider whether Rheem Australia should be ordered to facilitate the conduct of the ballot.

The Commission ordered that the Union provide further information to its members in relation to the proposed action, and that the ballot be rescheduled to a later date. The Commission also ordered that Rheem Australia facilitate the conduct of the ballot, provided that the Union provided the required information to its members.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Rheem Australia Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established