DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Workers’ Union, The
v
Quickstep Technologies Pty Ltd
(B2018/840)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 17 SEPTEMBER 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Quickstep Technologies 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 Quickstep Technologies Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 17 September 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 C Donovan 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 PR700481.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Workers' Union, acting on behalf of employees of Quickstep Technologies Pty Ltd, sought an order to facilitate a proposed ballot of the employees to determine their support for protected action. The employer, Quickstep Technologies Pty Ltd, opposed the ballot on the basis that it was not in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed ballot complied with the necessary legal requirements and if it should be approved to proceed.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed ballot was conducted in accordance with the statutory framework. The Act sets out specific procedures for balloting employees regarding protected action, and the Commission needed to ascertain whether these procedures had been followed. The primary concern was whether the ballot notice contained all the required information and whether the ballot was to be conducted in a fair and orderly manner.

The Commission examined the ballot notice and found that it did not comply with the requirements of the Act. The notice lacked essential information, including a clear explanation of the proposed protected action and the potential consequences for both employees and the employer. Additionally, the notice did not provide adequate detail on the voting process. As a result, the Commission determined that the ballot did not meet the necessary legal standards and, consequently, could not be approved. The employer's opposition was upheld, and the proposed ballot was rejected.

The Fair Work Commission rejected the proposed ballot of employees of Quickstep Technologies Pty Ltd due to non-compliance with the statutory requirements. The decision was based on the insufficiency of the ballot notice, which failed to include all the necessary information as mandated by the Fair Work Act 2009.

Australian Workers' Union, The v Quickstep Technologies 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