Australian Workers' Union, The v Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd T/A BBRG Australia Summary

[2018] FWC 6683

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Australian Workers’ Union, The

Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd T/A BBRG Australia

(B2018/990)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 29 OCTOBER 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd.

This is an application by the Australian Workers’ 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 Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 29 October 2018, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr P Delaney 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 PR701861.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case before the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Workers' Union sought a declaration that proposed protected action by employees of Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd T/A BBRG Australia was valid. The nature of the dispute involved the procedural legitimacy of a ballot to authorise industrial action by the employees. The court was required to determine whether the ballot process was conducted in accordance with the relevant industrial laws and if it met the necessary standards for authorisation of protected action. Specifically, the union needed to prove that the ballot complied with the requirements for a valid authorisation of protected action under the Fair Work Act.

The legal issues before the commission centred on the validity of the ballot process, including whether the union properly notified the employer of the ballot, whether the ballot was conducted in a fair and lawful manner, and if the results accurately reflected the employees' intentions. The union argued that the ballot was valid and that the employees had authorised the proposed protected action. Conversely, Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd contested the validity of the ballot, claiming procedural irregularities and procedural deficiencies.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. It assessed whether the union had given adequate notice to the employer and whether the ballot process was conducted fairly. The commission found that the union had complied with the procedural requirements for a valid ballot, including proper notification and adherence to fair practices. As a result, the commission determined that the ballot was valid, and the employees had indeed authorised the proposed protected action. Consequently, the commission upheld the union's claim, declaring the ballot valid and legally binding.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission ruled in favour of the Australian Workers' Union, finding the proposed protected action ballot of the employees of Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd to be valid. The commission's decision was based on the finding that the union had properly notified the employer and conducted the ballot in a fair and lawful manner. As a result, the employees' authorisation of the protected action was upheld, and the union was granted the declaration sought.

Australian Workers' Union, The v Bekaert Wire Ropes Pty Ltd T/A BBRG Australia

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established