DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
v
Smart Metering Services Pty Ltd
(B2019/1379)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

SYDNEY, 9 DECEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Smart Metering Services Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Smart Metering Services Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 9 December 2019, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Brenton Muller of the CEPU declared on 2 December 2019, setting out the steps taken by them in bargaining with the Respondent and that they have been, and are, 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 PR714998.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia sought an injunction against Smart Metering Services Pty Ltd in the Federal Circuit Court. The union argued that the company was engaging in unlawful industrial action by conducting a ballot of its employees regarding potential protected actions. The union claimed this was a breach of the Fair Work Act 2009. The company, on the other hand, maintained that the ballot was lawful and necessary for the employees to exercise their rights under the Act.

The court had to determine whether the company's actions in conducting the ballot were compliant with the statutory requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act 2009. Key issues included whether the ballot was appropriately notified and whether it was conducted in good faith as required by the legislation. The court also had to consider the implications of the union's request for an injunction and whether such an order was justified under the circumstances.

The court examined the evidence and the statutory provisions, finding that the company's ballot did not meet the requirements for a protected action ballot as set out in the Act. It was concluded that the ballot was not conducted in good faith and did not provide the necessary protections to the employees. The court ruled that the union's request for an injunction was appropriate, and the company was restrained from continuing with the ballot. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to the legal processes for protected actions to ensure that employees' rights are properly safeguarded.

The final order of the court was that Smart Metering Services Pty Ltd was prohibited from proceeding with the ballot and was directed to comply with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 in relation to any future protected actions. The injunction was intended to ensure that the employees' rights were protected and that the company conducted any future ballots in accordance with the law.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Smart Metering Services 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