Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (128V) & Australian Rail Tram and Bus Industry Union (RTBU) v Sydney Trains
What happened
The Applicant and the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (RTBU) applied to the Fair Work Commission to resolve a dispute with Sydney Trains regarding Cadwelding work performed by Signal Electricians. The dispute arose from directions issued by Sydney Trains concerning how this task should be carried out. Historically, Rail Bond Welders primarily performed Cadwelding, but that role was disbanded around 15 years ago and now Signal Electricians often perform the work. A previous decision ([2025] FWCFB 3793) established a 'status quo' before the dispute began.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission determined to deal with the dispute under section 739 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission found that Cadwelding is commonly used by Sydney Trains and that Signal Electricians are required to perform it. While the National Competency does not mandate a specific fastening method, the Commission acknowledged differing training levels among Signal Electricians, some of whom did not complete the Certificate IV which includes this competency.
What it means for employers
Sydney Trains should review its approach to ensuring Signal Electricians have appropriate training and competencies for tasks like Cadwelding. The decision highlights the importance of considering the historical context and varying skill levels within the workforce when issuing work directions. Employers need to ensure that any changes in work practices are clearly communicated and accompanied by adequate training.
What it means for employees
Employees should be aware of their rights regarding workplace safety and proper training for tasks they are required to perform. If employees feel they lack the necessary skills or training, they can raise concerns with their union or employer. The decision acknowledges that some Signal Electricians may not have received specific Cadwelding training.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Send your details to Liquid Employment Lawyers
Liquid Employment Lawyers is a paid legal service and our referral partner, not free Fair Work advice. FairWork Mate may receive a referral fee from Liquid Legal. Tell them what has happened and a member of their team will call you back. For free general guidance, use our tools or call the Fair Work Ombudsman on 13 13 94.
Prefer to read first? About Liquid Employment Lawyers · Not sure if you need a lawyer? Read the legal help guides
Want more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Renews monthly at A$29.99 until you cancel. By continuing you agree to our Terms.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.