ENTERPRISE BARGAINING – protected action ballot – ss.437, 615A Fair Work Act 2009 – Full Bench – CFMEU is a bargaining representative of a number of employees to be covered by a proposed enterprise agreement that would cover all persons employed by AGL Loy Yang and AGL Energy Limited (AGL Energy), or a related body corporate of AGL Energy – AGL Loy Yang agreed to bargain – CFMEU applied for a protected action ballot order (PABO) – matter referred to Full Bench by President of Commission under s.615A of FW Act – both AGL Loy Yang and AGL Energy opposed the grant of a PABO on grounds including that the CFMEU could not apply for a PABO because there had not been a notification time in relation to the proposed enterprise agreement – at the time the CFMEU applied for a PABO there was no agreement by AGL Energy to bargain – CFMEU sought to amend the application by altering the identity of the group of employees to be balloted so as to limit that group to employees of AGL Loy Yang – AGL Loy Yang submitted that there had been no notification time for the proposed agreement – Full Bench held that the CFMEU had proposed an agreement with more than one employer at the time that it applied for a PABO – found that because one of the employers had not agreed to or initiated bargaining there was no valid application for a PABO – application for a PABO dismissed. Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v AGL Loy Yang P/L t/a AGL Loy Yang
…
