DECISION

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

Australian Workers' Union, The
v
LyondellBasell Australia Pty Ltd
(B2018/410)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 25 MAY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of LyondellBasell Australia Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Australian Workers’ Union (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 LyondellBasell Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 25 May 2018 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 S Wood 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 PR607452.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union sought an order requiring LyondellBasell Australia Pty Ltd to provide information to the union for the purpose of enabling the union to conduct a ballot of employees to ascertain whether they wished to take protected action. LyondellBasell sought to have the Union's application dismissed. The dispute was heard in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The legal issues to be decided were whether the Union was entitled to the information it sought, and if so, the form in which it should be provided. The court was required to interpret the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, including the right of employees to organise and take industrial action. The court also had to consider the principles of proportionality and relevance in relation to the information requested by the Union.

The court found that the Union was entitled to the information it sought as it was relevant to the proposed protected action. The court held that the right of employees to organise and take industrial action was a fundamental aspect of the Australian industrial relations system and that the information sought was necessary to enable the Union to conduct a ballot of its members. The court rejected LyondellBasell's argument that the information was irrelevant or excessive, finding that it was necessary to enable the Union to make an informed decision about whether to proceed with the protected action. The court ordered LyondellBasell to provide the information in a specified form and within a specified timeframe.

The court's decision reinforced the importance of the right of employees to organise and take industrial action and the role of unions in facilitating this process. The court also highlighted the need for employers to provide information to unions in a timely and relevant manner to enable them to effectively represent their members' interests.

Australian Workers' Union, The v LyondellBasell 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