DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v
Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd
(B2021/115)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 26 FEBRUARY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 25 February 2021, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose 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 Mitch Hughes of the Applicant declared on 24 February 2021, 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 PR727338.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union, on behalf of its members, brought proceedings against Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The dispute centred on a proposed protected action ballot of employees, which the Union sought to conduct to gauge the level of support for potential industrial action. Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd contested the ballot, arguing it was not necessary or appropriate.

The legal issues before the Commission were primarily whether the Union's proposed ballot complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. This included whether there was a genuine dispute, and if the ballot was reasonably likely to occur. Additionally, the Commission needed to determine whether the ballot was necessary and not an abuse of the process.

The Fair Work Commission found that there was a genuine dispute between the parties, and that the proposed industrial action was reasonably likely to occur. The Commission emphasised that the purpose of the ballot was to determine the level of support among employees for potential industrial action. It was held that the Union's proposed ballot was not an abuse of the process and was necessary to facilitate meaningful negotiations. The Commission concluded that the ballot was in compliance with the Act and directed Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd to facilitate the ballot.

In light of the findings, the Fair Work Commission ordered Batchfire Callide Management Pty Ltd to facilitate the proposed ballot of employees as per the Union's request. The company was required to provide necessary information and assistance to ensure the ballot could proceed in an orderly and efficient manner. The Union was also directed to conduct the ballot in accordance with the terms set out in its application.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Batchfire Callide Management 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