Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Schneider Electric Buildings Australia Pty Ltd Summary

[2018] FWC 2176

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

Schneider Electric Buildings Australia Pty Ltd

(B2018/263)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 17 APRIL 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Schneider Electric Buildings Australia Pty Ltd.

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 Schneider Electric Buildings Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 16 April 2018 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

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 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.

An order has been separately issued in PR602047.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission, led by Commissioner Ryan, considered a dispute between the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Schneider Electric Buildings Australia Pty Ltd. The union sought authorisation for a protected action ballot of employees, which involved a potential strike action. The union argued that the ballot was necessary due to ongoing issues concerning workplace conditions and the employer's refusal to engage in meaningful negotiations.

The legal issues at the heart of this case revolved around the union's right to organise a protected action ballot and the employer's obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the union had provided sufficient evidence to support its claim that there were genuine issues for negotiation and whether the employer had adequately engaged in bargaining. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the proposed industrial action was lawful and whether the union had followed the correct procedures.

The Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and assessed the nature of the issues in dispute. The Commission found that the union had demonstrated genuine issues for negotiation, as the employer had failed to engage in meaningful discussions and had not addressed key concerns raised by the union. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the proposed industrial action was lawful and that the union had followed the correct procedures in seeking authorisation for the ballot. The Commission concluded that the union had met the necessary threshold to organise the protected action ballot.

In light of these findings, the Commission authorised the union to conduct a protected action ballot of the employees. This decision highlights the importance of employers engaging in good faith negotiations with unions and the Commission's willingness to support lawful industrial action when appropriate. The final orders of the Commission confirmed the authorisation of the protected action ballot, allowing the union to proceed with the proposed industrial action.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Schneider Electric Buildings Australia Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established