Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Vestas Australian Wind Technology Pty Limited Summary

[2022] FWC 2016

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

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

Vestas - Australian Wind Technology Pty Limited

(B2022/1145)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 29 JULY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Vestas - Australian Wind Technology Pty Limited

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 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Vestas - Australian Wind Technology Pty Limited (Respondent).

On 29 July 2022, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mark Mocerino of the Applicant declared on 26 July 2022, 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 PR744342.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (the Union) and Vestas Australian Wind Technology Pty Limited (Vestas). The Union applied to the Fair Work Commission for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Vestas. Vestas did not oppose the application, and the Commission decided to determine the matter on the papers without a hearing.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the Union had met the requirements under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot, and whether there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement. The Union had to demonstrate that it had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Vestas and that the requirements in section 443(1) of the Act had been met.

The Commission found that the Union had met the requirements for a protected action ballot. It was satisfied that the Union had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Vestas, and that the requirements in section 443(1) of the Act had been met. The statutory declaration of Mark Mocerino of the Union, which set out the steps taken by the Union in bargaining with Vestas, was sufficient evidence of the Union's efforts to reach an agreement. The Commission also found that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement.

The Fair Work Commission issued an Order in PR744342, granting the Union's application for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Vestas. The Union was now able to proceed with the ballot, subject to the terms and conditions of the Order.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Vestas Australian Wind Technology Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established