Blue Star Pacific Pty Ltd v Communications Electrical Electronic Energy Information Postal Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia

The appeal in Blue Star Pacific Pty Ltd v Communications Electrical Electronic Energy Information Postal Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia concerns whether Blue Star provided its employees with a reasonable opportunity to decide on a proposed collective agreement, as required under s 340(2) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth). The Communications Electrical Electronic Energy Information Postal Plumbing & Allied Services Union of Australia (the Union) sought declarations regarding the operation of s 340 in relation to a proposed employee collective agreement. On 30 June 2009, a single judge of the Court declared that Blue Star had not provided its employees with a reasonable opportunity to decide whether they wanted to approve the proposed agreement, and thus the agreement was not validly approved under the Act. Blue Star appealed against these orders to the full Court.

The legal issues the Court had to decide included whether the error in the ballot paper could be considered in isolation, and whether all relevant circumstances were taken into account in the primary judge's judgment. The Court also needed to determine if Blue Star had given its employees a reasonable opportunity to decide on the proposed agreement, considering the specific provision about duration in the agreement and the fact that provision was made for wage increases in each of the years 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012.

The Court found that the error in the ballot paper could not be considered in isolation and that not all relevant circumstances were taken into account in the primary judge's judgment. Some circumstances that may have been relevant were not the subject of evidence. The Court concluded that the Union did not establish that Blue Star had failed to give its employees a reasonable opportunity to decide whether they wanted to approve the agreement. The appeal was allowed, and the declarations made by the primary judge were set aside. An order dismissing the Union's application was substituted for those declarations. There was no order as to the costs of the proceeding or the appeal due to s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).