DECISION

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

Australian Workers' Union, The
v
Sibelco Australia Limited
(B2017/173)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 1 MARCH 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Sibelco Australia Limited.

[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 Sibelco Australia Limited (the Respondent).

[2] On 28 February 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 J Sharp 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 PR590571.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union, on behalf of its members, brought proceedings against Sibelco Australia Limited, a company involved in the mining and mineral processing industry. The dispute centred around a proposed ballot for protected action by the employees of Sibelco Australia Limited, which the union sought to facilitate. The Fair Work Commission was the tribunal that heard the case.

The legal issues before the Commission included whether the proposed ballot was in accordance with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the ballot notice provided to the employees was sufficient. The union argued that the ballot notice was inadequate because it did not provide sufficient information to the employees regarding the proposed protected action. Sibelco Australia Limited contended that the ballot notice complied with the statutory requirements and that the ballot should proceed.

In determining the matter, the Commission considered the statutory provisions and relevant case law. The Commission found that the ballot notice provided by Sibelco Australia Limited was indeed compliant with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The notice contained all the necessary information, including the proposed action, the date and method of the ballot, and the right of employees to withdraw from the action at any time. The Commission also noted that the notice was delivered to the employees in a timely manner, allowing them to make an informed decision about participating in the ballot. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the union's application and ruled in favour of Sibelco Australia Limited.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed ballot of employees of Sibelco Australia Limited proceed as planned, in accordance with the ballot notice provided by the company. The union's application was dismissed, and no further orders were made.

Australian Workers' Union, The v Sibelco Australia Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established