DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Australian Workers' Union, The
v
Broadspectrum Pty Ltd
(B2017/192)

COMMISSIONER RYAN

MELBOURNE, 9 MARCH 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Broadspectrum Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by The Australian Workers’ Union (the Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Broadspectrum Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 8 March 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of
Mr N Blackford 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR590759.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union initiated proceedings against Broadspectrum Pty Ltd concerning a proposed ballot for protected industrial action by Broadspectrum's employees. The dispute was adjudicated in the Federal Court of Australia. The Union sought to facilitate a ballot for its members, which Broadspectrum opposed, arguing that the ballot did not comply with statutory requirements.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the ballot notice provided by the Union was compliant with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the Union had properly notified Broadspectrum of the proposed industrial action. The court needed to determine if the ballot notice contained the necessary information and if the Union had followed the correct procedural steps as mandated by the Act.

In delivering the judgment, the court examined the statutory requirements for conducting a ballot for protected action. It held that the Union's ballot notice did not fully comply with the legislative provisions, specifically in terms of the information required to be included in the notice. The court found that the Union had not provided Broadspectrum with adequate details regarding the nature of the proposed industrial action, which was a fundamental requirement under the Act. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Broadspectrum, determining that the ballot notice was invalid.

The Federal Court of Australia granted Broadspectrum's application, declaring the ballot notice invalid and prohibiting the Union from proceeding with the ballot. The Union was ordered to pay Broadspectrum's costs of the proceedings.

Australian Workers' Union, The v Broadspectrum Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established