| [2022] FWC 1095 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action
Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union
v
Pacific National Services Pty Ltd T/A Pacific National
(B2022/409)
| VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI | MELBOURNE, 10 MAY 2022 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Pacific National
This is an application by the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Pacific National Services Pty Ltd T/A Pacific National (Respondent).
On 10 May 2022, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.
In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.
On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Gregory Cameron of the Applicant declared on 6 May 2022, setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.
An Order and Directions have been separately issued in PR741414 and PR741416 respectively.
VICE PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR741415>
- AGLC
- Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v Pacific National Services Pty Ltd T/A Pacific National [2022] FWC 1095
- Case
- [2022] FWC 1095
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed ballot constituted a 'protected action ballot' under the Fair Work Act 2009. Additionally, the Commission had to determine whether Pacific National's objections to the ballot were justified and whether the ballot's implementation would cause undue hardship or significant operational disruption to the company.
The Commission examined the provisions of the Fair Work Act and the specific circumstances of the proposed ballot. It considered the nature of the industrial action, the potential impact on Pacific National's operations, and the union's obligations under the Act. The Commission concluded that the proposed ballot was indeed a 'protected action ballot' and that the union had provided sufficient information to its members. However, it found that the ballot, if conducted, would cause significant operational disruption to Pacific National. Consequently, the Commission ordered that the ballot could proceed but required the union to take certain measures to mitigate the potential impact on Pacific National's operations. These measures included providing adequate notice, allowing for consultation, and ensuring that the ballot did not interfere with critical services.
The Commission's final orders allowed the union to proceed with the protected action ballot but mandated that the union implement the specified measures to minimise operational disruptions. The union was permitted to conduct the ballot, but it had to adhere to the conditions set by the Commission to balance its members' rights with Pacific National's operational needs.
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.