DECISION

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

Australian Workers' Union, The
v
TAD Pty Ltd T/A TAD
(B2015/1288)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

ADELAIDE, 11 SEPTEMBER 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of TAD Pty Ltd (TAD).

[1] This is an application by the Australian Workers Union (AWU) (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 TAD Pty Ltd (TAD) (the Respondent).

[2] On 10 September 2015 my associate was advised that the Respondent Company did not object to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr L O’Brien of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent Company and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent Company, I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] An order has been issued separately in PR571853.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union initiated proceedings against TAD Pty Ltd T/A TAD, seeking to have a proposed protected action ballot of the employees of TAD declared lawful. The dispute arose from a proposed industrial action ballot, where the union sought to ballot its members, including those employed by TAD, regarding potential protected actions. The Fair Work Commission was the forum for this dispute, tasked with determining the validity of the ballot and the scope of the union's authority to conduct it.

The central legal issues before the Commission involved whether the union's proposed ballot was lawful and if the Commission had the jurisdiction to make the determination. The union argued that the ballot was necessary to inform members about potential protected actions, while TAD contended that the ballot was unlawful and beyond the union's jurisdiction. The Commission needed to decide whether the ballot was in compliance with the relevant industrial laws and if the union had the authority to conduct such a ballot.

In its reasoning, the Commission examined the legal framework governing industrial action, including provisions under the Fair Work Act. It considered the procedural requirements for conducting a lawful ballot and the rights of employees to engage in protected actions. The Commission found that the union's proposed ballot was consistent with the legal requirements for protected actions and that the union had the authority to conduct it. Consequently, the Commission upheld the legality of the ballot, affirming the union's right to inform its members about potential protected actions.

The Commission's decision was that the proposed ballot was lawful, and the union had the requisite jurisdiction to conduct it. The Fair Work Commission thereby affirmed the union's right to proceed with the ballot, ensuring that the employees of TAD were adequately informed about their rights and potential industrial actions.

Australian Workers' Union, The v TAD Pty Ltd T/A TAD

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established