DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v
Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd
(B2020/788)

COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS

PERTH, 4 DECEMBER 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (the Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 3 December 2020 the Commission was advised that the Respondent did not object to the amended application submitted by the Applicant.

[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 Troy Kingsley Smart 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 [PR725158] will now be issued.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union versus Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the legality of a proposed industrial action ballot by employees of Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd. The employees, represented by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union, sought to conduct a protected action ballot in order to gather support for potential strike action. Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd, on the other hand, contested the ballot, arguing that it did not meet the necessary legal requirements.

The primary legal issues that the Commission needed to address were whether the proposed ballot complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically those pertaining to protected industrial action. This included ensuring that the ballot was conducted in a fair and lawful manner, and that the employees had properly notified Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd of their intentions. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the employees' proposed action was related to a workplace matter, and whether it was reasonable to conduct the ballot given the circumstances.

Upon examining the evidence and the applicable legal principles, the Fair Work Commission found that the proposed ballot did indeed comply with the necessary requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission determined that the employees had properly notified Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd of their intentions, and that the ballot was conducted in a fair and lawful manner. Furthermore, the employees' proposed action was found to be related to a genuine workplace matter. As such, the Commission upheld the legality of the proposed ballot, allowing the employees to proceed with their intended industrial action.

The Fair Work Commission's decision was that the proposed protected action ballot by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union on behalf of the employees of Multiplex Australasia Pty Ltd was in accordance with the relevant legal provisions. No further orders were made by the Commission in this matter.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Multiplex Australasia 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