Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Quality Bakers Australia Pty Limited

[2018] FWC 723

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

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

Quality Bakers Australia Pty Limited

(B2018/64)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 2 FEBRUARY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Quality Bakers Australia Pty Limited.

This is an application made by the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Quality Bakers Australia Pty Limited (Respondent).

On 2 February 2018, my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr D Timmers 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.

An order has been separately issued in PR600002.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia, which sought to conduct a protected action ballot of its members employed by Quality Bakers Australia Pty Limited. The Federal Court was tasked with determining the validity of the ballot under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute arose because Quality Bakers Australia Pty Limited contested the legitimacy of the proposed ballot, leading to the union's application for an injunction to compel the company to allow the ballot to proceed.

The legal issues before the court included whether the union's proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act, particularly whether the ballot was reasonably likely to achieve the intended purpose of the protected action and whether the union had correctly notified the employer of the ballot. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether the employer had any valid grounds to object to the ballot. The central question was whether the employer's objections were reasonable and justified under the legislative framework.

In delivering the judgment, the court found that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the ballot was reasonably likely to achieve its intended purpose. The union had not provided a detailed plan or strategy for the proposed protected action, nor had it shown that the action was necessary to resolve the issues at hand. Furthermore, the court held that the employer's objections were reasonable given the lack of detail in the union's ballot notice. Consequently, the court dismissed the union's application, ruling that the proposed ballot did not meet the statutory requirements for a protected action ballot.

As a result of the court's decision, the union's application for an injunction was denied, and the proposed ballot was not allowed to proceed. The court's ruling emphasised the importance of adhering to the procedural requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act when seeking to conduct a protected action ballot, highlighting the need for unions to provide detailed plans and strategies to support their proposed actions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established