DECISION

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

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia - Electrical, Energy and Services Division - Victorian Divisional Branch
v
Paper Australia Pty Ltd T/A Australian Paper
(B2020/93)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 18 FEBRUARY 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Paper Australia Pty Ltd - Maryvale Mill.

[1] This is an application by Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Paper Australia Pty Ltd T/A Australian Paper (Respondent).

[2] On 18 February 2020, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr P Mooney 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 PR716845.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case between the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia Electrical, Energy and Services Division Victorian Divisional Branch and Paper Australia Pty Ltd involved a dispute concerning a proposed ballot of employees at the Maryvale Mill regarding protected action. The Fair Work Commission heard the case. The central legal issue was whether the proposed ballot, which sought to authorise protected action in response to alleged unfair dismissals and other workplace grievances, complied with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the ballot notice was sufficiently clear and comprehensive to enable employees to make an informed decision about whether to support the proposed action.

The Commission examined the nature and content of the ballot notice and the context in which it was issued. It considered whether the notice provided employees with adequate information to understand the potential consequences of voting in favour of the protected action, including the possibility of industrial action that could disrupt operations at the Maryvale Mill. The Commission also assessed whether the notice correctly identified the employers and employees involved, the specific issues in dispute, and the proposed form of action. After a thorough analysis, the Commission concluded that the ballot notice did not meet the statutory requirements for clarity and comprehensiveness. The notice did not sufficiently inform employees about the potential impact of the proposed action, nor did it clearly outline the specific issues in dispute.

As a result, the Commission disallowed the proposed ballot. The decision was based on the grounds that the ballot notice failed to comply with the statutory requirements designed to ensure that employees could make an informed decision. The Commission emphasised the importance of providing clear and comprehensive information in ballot notices to protect both the rights of employees to engage in protected action and the interests of employers in maintaining operational continuity. The Commission's decision underscores the need for unions to carefully prepare ballot notices to ensure compliance with the Fair Work Act. The final orders included the disallowance of the proposed ballot, with directions for the union to revise and resubmit the ballot notice if it wished to pursue the matter further.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia Electrical, Energy and Services Division Victorian Divisional Branch v Paper Australia Pty..

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established