Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v R.M.Watson Pty Ltd T/A RM Watson Summary

[2018] FWC 6097

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union

R.M.Watson Pty Ltd T/A RM Watson

(B2018/878)

Building, metal and civil construction industries
Deputy President Gostencnik	MELBOURNE, 1 OCTOBER 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of R M Watson Pty Ltd.

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 R.M. Watson Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 28 September 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 Ms R Mallia 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 PR700948.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union versus R.M. Watson Pty Ltd T/A RM Watson, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with deliberating over a dispute involving a proposed protected action ballot of employees of R.M. Watson Pty Ltd, an engineering services company. The union, representing the employees, sought to conduct a ballot to authorise potential industrial action, which the company opposed on several grounds, including the belief that the union had not properly followed the requisite processes under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues before the Commission involved the interpretation and application of sections of the Fair Work Act, specifically those concerning the procedural requirements for a protected action ballot. The company argued that the union failed to meet the statutory prerequisites for conducting such a ballot, including the provision of a written notice to the employer and the correct manner in which the ballot was to be conducted. The union contended that it had complied with all necessary legislative requirements and that the company’s objections were unfounded.

The Commission examined the statutory provisions and the union’s actions in detail, assessing whether the union had adhered to the formal requirements set out in the legislation. The Commission found that the union had indeed complied with the necessary procedures, including providing the requisite written notice to the company. It was determined that the union’s conduct in proposing the ballot was in accordance with the Fair Work Act, and thus the company’s objections were dismissed. The Commission upheld the union's right to proceed with the ballot, subject to any further legal requirements being met.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission ruled in favour of the union, allowing the proposed ballot to proceed. The company’s objections were rejected, and the union was permitted to conduct the ballot as planned, provided that all other legislative requirements were met.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v R.M.Watson Pty Ltd T/A RM Watson

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established