Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v UGL Rail Services Pty Limited Summary

[2022] FWC 349

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union
v

UGL Rail Services Pty Limited

(B2022/88)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 18 FEBRUARY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of UGL Rail Services Pty Limited.

This is an application by the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of UGL Rail Services Pty Limited (Respondent).

On 18 February 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Ms Amanda Swayn of the Applicant 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 has been separately issued in PR738494.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (the Union) sought an injunction against UGL Rail Services Pty Limited (UGL) to prevent it from proceeding with a proposed ballot of its employees regarding protected industrial action. The Union alleged that UGL had not provided sufficient information to the employees to enable them to make an informed decision about participating in the proposed action. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission (the Commission), which was the relevant tribunal for such industrial disputes.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether UGL had failed to provide adequate information to its employees, and whether the proposed ballot was lawful under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Union argued that the information provided was insufficient, misleading, and did not meet the requirements of the Act. UGL contended that it had provided all necessary information and that the ballot was lawful. The Commission had to determine whether the Union's claims were substantiated and whether an injunction should be granted to prevent the ballot.

The Commission found that UGL had not provided adequate information to its employees, and the ballot was thus unlawful. The Commission considered the content and quality of the information provided, and the employees' ability to make an informed decision based on that information. It concluded that the information was insufficient and misleading, as it failed to disclose certain critical information. As a result, the Commission granted the Union's application for an injunction, preventing UGL from proceeding with the ballot. The Commission also ordered UGL to provide further information to its employees and to take steps to ensure compliance with the Act in future.

The Commission's decision highlights the importance of providing employees with accurate and comprehensive information when conducting a ballot for protected industrial action. Employers must ensure that the information provided meets the legal requirements and enables employees to make an informed decision. Failure to do so may result in the ballot being deemed unlawful and an injunction being granted to prevent it from proceeding.

Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v UGL Rail Services Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established