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 Ltd T/A Rheem Service
(B2019/1307)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 14 NOVEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Rheem Australia Pty Ltd T/A Rheem Service.

[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 Rheem Australia Pty Ltd T/A Rheem Service (Respondent).

[2] On 14 November 2019, 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 N McCubbin 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR714300.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Rheem Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Rheem Service. The union sought to conduct a protected action ballot among the employees of Rheem Service. Rheem Service contested the ballot, arguing that the union had not provided adequate information to the employees and that the ballot was not in compliance with certain statutory requirements.

The primary legal issue for the court was whether the union's proposed ballot complied with the relevant industrial laws. Specifically, the court had to determine if the union had fulfilled its obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 to provide employees with sufficient information about the proposed industrial action. The court also had to consider whether the union had correctly identified the bargaining agent for the employees and if the ballot itself was structured in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

The court found that the union had not adequately informed the employees about the proposed industrial action, as required by the Fair Work Act. The union's notification to the employees did not include all necessary details about the potential action, such as the specific nature of the dispute and the potential impact on the employees. Additionally, the court determined that the union had not correctly identified the bargaining agent, which is a critical requirement for a protected action ballot. As a result, the court ruled that the proposed ballot was not in compliance with the statutory requirements and dismissed the union's application. The court's decision effectively prohibited the union from proceeding with the ballot under the current circumstances.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Rheem Australia Pty Ltd T/A Rheem Service

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established