v SUEZ Water Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Australia & New Zealand Summary

[2025] FWC 1214

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.459 - Application to extend the 30 day period in which industrial action is authorised by protected action ballot

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

SUEZ Water Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Australia & New Zealand

(B2025/689)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 1 MAY 2025

Application to extend the 30 day period in relation to B2025/211.

This matter concerns the declaration of the result of a protected action ballot PR784113 held in matter B2025/211 and declared on 24 March 2025.

The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) has made an application pursuant to s.459(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) to extend the 30 day period in which industrial action is authorised by the relevant protected action ballot.

Section 459(3) of the Act provides as follows:

“(3) The FWC may extend the 30-day period referred to in subparagraph (1)(d)(i) by up to 30 days if:

(a) an applicant for the protected action ballot order applies to the FWC for the period to be extended; and

(b) the period has not previously been extended.”

The application contends that each of the relevant requirements have been met and that the period should be extended by a further 30 days from the expiry of the original 30 days.

SUEZ Water Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Australia & New Zealand has advised the Commission it has no objection to this application, as amended to correct the identity of the employer.

I am satisfied that the relevant requirements of the Act have been met and that the application should be granted.

Accordingly, pursuant to section 459(3) of the Act, I order that the 30 day period for the commencement of protected industrial action for eligible employees who were subject to the ballot and are employed by the Employer be extended by a further 30 days.

This order will operate on and from 1 May 2025.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission was presented with an application from the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU) to extend the 30-day period in which industrial action could be authorised by a protected action ballot. The employer, SUEZ Water Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Australia & New Zealand, did not object to the application. The dispute centred on the extension of the 30-day period under section 459(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009, which allows for an extension if the requirements are met and the period has not been previously extended. The primary legal issue was whether the application met the statutory criteria for an extension and whether granting the extension would be appropriate.

The Deputy President, Hampton, found that the application met the statutory requirements and that there were no objections from the employer. The conditions stipulated in section 459(3) of the Act were fulfilled, including the applicant’s application for the extension and the fact that the period had not been previously extended. The Commission considered it appropriate to grant the extension, ensuring that the union's request was within the legal framework provided by the Act. As a result, the Deputy President ordered that the 30-day period for the commencement of protected industrial action be extended by a further 30 days, effective from 1 May 2025.

This decision underscores the Commission's role in balancing the rights of employers and employees under the Fair Work Act, ensuring that any application for an extension is considered within the legal parameters. The extension granted provides the union with additional time to organise and undertake industrial action, if deemed necessary, while also taking into account the employer's rights and the need for timely resolution of the industrial dispute. The order is clear and aligns with the statutory provisions, providing certainty for all parties involved.

v SUEZ Water Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Australia & New Zealand

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established