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

[2021] FWC 6542

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia
v
Wormald Australia Pty Ltd
(B2021/1204)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 8 DECEMBER 2021

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

[1] This is an application by the 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 Wormald Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 7 December 2021, 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 declaration of Mr Paul Coffey 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 PR736536.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia versus Wormald Australia Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) was tasked with resolving a dispute involving a proposed industrial action by employees of Wormald Australia Pty Ltd. The union sought to conduct a ballot of its members employed by Wormald to potentially authorise protected action. Wormald challenged the union's authority to conduct the ballot, arguing that the union was not appropriately certified to represent the employees in question.

The legal issues before the FWC encompassed whether the union had the requisite authority and standing to organise and conduct a ballot for protected action among the employees of Wormald Australia Pty Ltd. Additionally, the court had to determine if the union's procedures for balloting complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The FWC needed to ascertain whether the union's actions were procedurally fair and whether the union had followed the necessary steps to ensure the legitimacy and effectiveness of the proposed ballot.

The FWC examined the certification status of the union and whether it had the appropriate industrial instruments in place to represent the employees of Wormald Australia Pty Ltd. The Commission found that the union was indeed certified to represent the employees in question and that its procedures for conducting the ballot were in compliance with the legislative requirements. The FWC concluded that the union had taken all necessary steps to ensure the ballot was conducted fairly and effectively. Therefore, the union's right to conduct the ballot was upheld.

The FWC ordered that the union was entitled to proceed with the proposed ballot of employees of Wormald Australia Pty Ltd, subject to the union following the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009. The decision affirmed the union's authority and standing to organise the ballot, provided that the union adhered to the specified legal processes in conducting the ballot.

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

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established