Australian Workers' Union v Holcim (Australia) Pty Limited Summary

[2025] FWC 2699

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Australian Workers' Union
v

Holcim (Australia) Pty Limited

(B2025/1422)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 11 SEPTEMBER 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Holcim (Australia) Pty Limited

This is an application by the Australian Workers' Union (AWU or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Holcim (Australia) Pty Limited (Holcim or Employer).

On 11 September 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer did not object to the application but observed that it may have been taken prematurely given the foreshadowed access period for a proposed agreement.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Danny Humphrey, Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the AWU in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Holcim, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

The ballot is to be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).

For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 24 October 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

An Order has been separately issued in PR791654.

This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] This is, in effect, 30 working days from the making of the Order and is the minimum period required by the AEC.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union (AWU) applied to the Fair Work Commission for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of Holcim (Australia) Pty Limited (Holcim). The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009. Holcim did not object to the application but noted it may have been premature given the anticipated access period for a proposed agreement. The matter was determined on the papers without a hearing.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the AWU had met all the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act and if the notification time for the proposed agreement was valid. The AWU had provided a declaration from Danny Humphrey, an Organiser, outlining the union's bargaining efforts and asserting it was genuinely attempting to reach an agreement with Holcim. The Commission found that all requirements had been satisfied and there was a valid notification time.

In reaching its decision, the Commission considered the declaration and other materials provided. It was satisfied that the AWU had genuinely been trying to reach an agreement and that the requirements of section 443(1) had been met. The date for closing voting was set as 24 October 2025, which is the minimum period required by the Australian Electoral Commission. The Commission also decided that the matter would be assigned to another member to conduct a compulsory conciliation conference under section 448A of the Act.

The Commission issued an order for the ballot, specifying the closing date for voting and assigning the matter to another member for the conciliation conference. The order also included directions to ensure the parties attend the conference ready for meaningful negotiations.

Australian Workers' Union v Holcim (Australia) Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established