ETU v Essential Energy [2012] NSWIRComm 1025

Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: ETU v Essential Energy [2012] NSWIRComm 1025 Hearing dates: 31/07/12, 01/08/12,27/08/12 Decision date: 26 September 2012 Before: Ritchie C Decision: Catchwords: Section 146B of IR Act dispute notification filed- Work crew during live wire work found to have breached various policies- Investigation resulted in first warning being issued- Applicant accepted investigation reports findings but Applicant believed that policy not applied correctly- Applicant submitted that policy had wrong words in place-Commission rejected this submission-found policy had been applied correctly. Legislation Cited: Industrial Relations Act, 1996 Category: Principal judgment Parties: ETU (applicant)

Essential Energy (Respondent) Representation: Mr A Howell (for the applicant) Mr B Cross ( for the respondent) Ms K Jervis from Norton Rose ( for the respondent) File Number(s): IRC 311 of 2012

DECISION

Background

1The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU), New South Wales Branch filed a dispute under s146B of the Industrial Relations Act, 1996 against Essential Energy on 6 February 2012. 2The question, dispute or difficulty was expressed in the following industrial matters: This dispute relates to the outcome of the Essential Energy Discipline policy and the failure to find suitable resolution of a discipline matter via internal appeal processes. 3A previous Statement issued on 23 May 2012 gave a background to this matter and a further timetable for the filing and serving of evidentiary material. The first two days of hearing in this matter took place in Mudgee with the final day in Sydney. The decision was then reserved.