The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Hydro-Electric Corporation Trading as Hydro Tasmania

Case [2025] FWC 2375


[2025] FWC 2375

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia
v

Hydro-Electric Corporation Trading AS Hydro Tasmania

(B2025/1279)

COMMISSIONER REDFORD

MELBOURNE, 14 AUGUST 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Hydro-Electric Corporation Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Hydro-Electric Corporation Trading As Hydro Tasmania

  1. This is an application by the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Hydro-Electric Corporation trading as Hydro Tasmania (Hydro Tasmania or Employer).

  1. I note that the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) and Administrative, Clerical & Services Union Vic/Tas Authorities & Services Branch (ASU)[1]  have made a separate application for a protected action ballot order in relation to the same proposed enterprise agreement.

  1. On 14 August 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer, in effect, does not object to the Application taking into account:

a.Consent was reached between the parties that a period of 5 working days be specified as to the period of written notice for the purposes of s.414(2)(b) of the Act to be provided by APESMA to the Employer for the purposes of taking protected industrial action in the form of action listed in Questions 8, 9, 10 and 17; and

b.An undertaking as to safety has been provided by APESMA in the form attached in Annexure A.

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

  1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of James Downie, Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the APESMA in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Hydro Tasmania, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of  the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

  1. The ballot is to be conducted by Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd (Fair Vote). Fair Vote has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.

  1. For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 28 August 2025.[2] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

  1. An Order has been separately issued in PR90668.

  1. This matter will shortly be the subject of a compulsory conciliation conference pursuant to s 448A of the Act. An Order will issue in due course requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference and it is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.

COMMISSIONER

ANNEXURE A


[1] B2025/1280

[2] This is, in effect, 10 working days from the making of the Order and was the date sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR790672>

Details
AGLC
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Hydro-Electric Corporation Trading as Hydro Tasmania [2025] FWC 2375
Case
[2025] FWC 2375
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves an application by the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order in relation to employees of Hydro-Electric Corporation trading as Hydro Tasmania. The proposed protected action involves industrial action listed in Questions 8, 9, 10, and 17. Notably, the Hydro-Electric Corporation has not objected to the application, taking into account that the parties agreed on a five-working-day notice period and APESMA provided an undertaking as to safety.

The court was required to determine if the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act were met, considering the steps taken by APESMA in bargaining with Hydro Tasmania and their genuine efforts to reach an agreement. The court also had to establish a closing date for the ballot and assess the suitability of the ballot agent, Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd, appointed to conduct the ballot.

The Commissioner found that the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met and all requirements under section 443(1) of the Act were satisfied. The Commissioner further determined the closing date for the voting period to be 28 August 2025, which also sets the ballot period for the purpose of section 448A(2) of the Act. Given the circumstances, the Commissioner decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing. The court also issued an Order in PR90668 and scheduled a compulsory conciliation conference under section 448A of the Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.