| [2025] FWC 1117 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union – The Maritime Union of Australia Division
v
Cape Flattery Silica Mines Pty Ltd
(B2025/647)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON | ADELAIDE, 22 APRIL 2025 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Cape Flattery Silica Mines Pty Ltd
This is an application by the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union, Maritime Union of Australia Division (MUA or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Cape Flattery Silica Mines Pty Ltd (Cape Flattery Silica or Employer).
I note that the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union’s Construction and General Division (CFMEU - C&G), the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (CEPU), the "Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) and the Australian Workers’ Union (AWU)[1] have each made a separate application for a protected action ballot order in relation to the same proposed enterprise agreement.
On 17 April 2025, the Commission was advised that the parties had reached a consent position in relation to the inclusion of a clause setting out an agreed position on exemptions that would apply during any period of industrial action and an extended notice period for taking protected industrial action.
In the circumstances, I have decided to amend the application to reflect the consent position reached and otherwise determined the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.
On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Dave Lyon, Union Official, setting out the steps taken by the MUA in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Cape Flattery Silica, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.
The ballot is to be conducted by Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd (CiVS). CiVS has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.
For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 2 May 2025.[2] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.
I am satisfied that there are relevant exceptional circumstances required by s.443(5), justifying an extended period of written notice for the purposes of s.414(2)(b) of the Act when taking industrial action set out in the Order made by the Commission. The minimum extended notice period of five (5) working days applies to the items listed within Clause 5 of the Order.
An Order has been separately issued in PR786311.
This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference along with the other related matters. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
[1] Respectively, B2025/626, B2025/627, B2025/628 and B2025/636.
[2] This is, in effect, 7 working days from the making of the Order and is consistent with the ballot period for the related matters.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR786312>
- AGLC
- Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union - the Maritime Union of Australia Division v Cape Flattery Silica Mines Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 1117
- Case
- [2025] FWC 1117
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court had to address involved determining whether the union had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with the employer, whether the notification time for the proposed agreement was met, and if there were exceptional circumstances justifying an extended notice period for industrial action. The court had to consider the declarations and evidence provided by the union, specifically from Dave Lyon, the Union Official, to ascertain that all requirements under section 443 of the Act had been fulfilled.
The court concluded that the union had indeed made genuine efforts to negotiate with the employer and that all procedural requirements were satisfied. The Commission determined that the date for closing the ballot was 2 May 2025, establishing the ballot period. Additionally, the court found that exceptional circumstances existed, warranting an extended notice period of five working days for the specified items listed in the Order. The court issued an Order to conduct a compulsory conciliation conference to facilitate further negotiations between the parties.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.