DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Workers’ Union, The
v
Integrated Packaging Australia Pty Ltd
(B2019/126)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 18 FEBRUARY 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Integrated Packaging Australia Pty Ltd.

[1] 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 Integrated Packaging Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 18 February 2019, 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 Blake Adair-Roberts 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 PR705037.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union, on behalf of certain employees, sought judicial intervention against Integrated Packaging Australia Pty Ltd, regarding a proposed protected action ballot. The employees, who are members of the union, intended to vote on a potential industrial action, and the union sought to compel the employer to facilitate this ballot. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian workplace relations tribunal with jurisdiction over employment disputes.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the employer was obligated to allow the union to conduct a ballot among its members to organise a protected industrial action. This question hinged on the interpretation of relevant sections of the Fair Work Act 2009, which governs the conduct of protected action. The Commission had to determine if the employer's refusal to facilitate the ballot constituted an unfair labour practice, and whether such a practice could be addressed through an order for compliance.

The Fair Work Commission found that the employer's refusal to facilitate the ballot constituted an unfair labour practice, as it hindered the union's ability to organise its members effectively. The Commission emphasised that the right to organise and engage in protected action is a fundamental aspect of industrial relations, protected under the Act. Consequently, the Commission issued an order mandating the employer to provide the necessary support and resources for the union to conduct the ballot. This decision underscored the importance of ensuring that employers do not interfere with employees' rights to organise and engage in lawful industrial activities.

The Commission's order required Integrated Packaging Australia Pty Ltd to facilitate the ballot by providing the necessary information and resources to the union, ensuring that the employees could exercise their rights without hindrance. The ruling reinforced the principle that employers must not impede the legitimate activities of unions, and that the Commission has the authority to intervene when such interference occurs. This decision serves as a reminder of the legal protections available to employees and unions in the context of industrial action.

Australian Workers' Union, The v Integrated Packaging Australia 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