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
v
Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd
(B2016/1083)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 11 OCTOBER 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (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 Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 11 October 2016 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 D King 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 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 PR586334.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission heard a dispute between the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd. The Union sought approval to conduct a ballot of employees regarding protected industrial action, while Fonterra opposed the ballot on the grounds that it did not meet the requirements for protected action. The case revolved around the interpretation and application of the relevant sections of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the Union's proposed ballot complied with the statutory provisions concerning protected industrial action. The Commission had to determine whether the ballot was related to a dispute of interest and if the ballot notice contained the required information. Additionally, the Commission considered whether the proposed action was likely to result in a detriment to Fonterra.

The Commission found that the Union's proposed ballot did not meet the statutory requirements for protected industrial action. The ballot did not specify the nature of the proposed action and the specific terms or conditions of employment that the employees sought to have improved. The Commission held that the ballot notice did not contain the required information as mandated by the Fair Work Act 2009. Consequently, the Commission rejected the Union's application and did not approve the proposed ballot of Fonterra employees.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the Union's application for approval of the proposed ballot of Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd employees. The Commission found that the ballot did not comply with the statutory requirements for protected industrial action as it did not specify the nature of the proposed action or the terms or conditions of employment to be improved. The decision highlights the importance of ensuring that ballot notices contain all the required information to be valid and approved by the Commission.

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established