Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Crane Services Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Crane Services Trust T/A Crane Services

[2022] FWC 2547

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v

Crane Services Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Crane Services Trust T/A Crane Services

(B2022/1433)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 21 SEPTEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Crane Services Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Crane Services Trust Trading As Crane Services

This is an application by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Crane Services Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Crane Services Trust trading as Crane Services (Respondent).

On 21 September 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Margues Gideon Albert Pare 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 PR746119.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission considered an application by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (the Union) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Crane Services Pty Ltd (the Employer). The Union applied for the order under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Employer did not object to the application, leading the Deputy President to determine the matter on the papers without a hearing.

The key legal issue the Deputy President had to decide was whether the Union had satisfied the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act, which includes proving a notification time for the proposed agreement and demonstrating genuine efforts to reach an agreement with the Employer. The Union provided a declaration by Margues Gideon Albert Pare, which outlined the steps taken during bargaining and confirmed the Union's ongoing efforts to reach an agreement. Based on this evidence, the Deputy President found that the Union met the necessary criteria.

In light of the findings, the Deputy President determined that an order should be issued for a protected action ballot. The Union's application was successful, and the order was issued separately in PR746119. This decision confirmed the Union's eligibility to proceed with a ballot for protected action, as it met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established