DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v
Icon Corporate Services Pty Ltd
(B2021/256)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 15 APRIL 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Icon Corporate Services 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 Icon Corporate Services Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 15 April 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 Robert Kera of the Applicant declared on 13 April 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 PR728693.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Icon Corporate Services Pty Ltd, the Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission was tasked with resolving a dispute regarding a proposed protected action ballot by employees of Icon Corporate Services Pty Ltd. The employees sought to ballot in order to take protected action, including a strike, due to concerns over their employment conditions. The employer, Icon Corporate Services Pty Ltd, contested the ballot, arguing that it did not meet the necessary legal requirements.

The legal issues before the court included whether the union had correctly complied with the procedural requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 for organising a ballot of employees for protected industrial action. This involved assessing whether the union had given the employer the requisite notice of the ballot and whether the ballot notice itself was valid. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the employer's objections to the ballot were justified.

The Full Bench of the Fair Work Commission found that the union had indeed complied with the statutory requirements for a ballot. The Commission held that the union had provided the employer with the necessary notice and that the ballot notice was valid. The Commission also determined that the employer's objections to the ballot did not have merit, as they were not based on any legal grounds that could invalidate the ballot. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the union, allowing the proposed ballot to proceed.

The Full Bench's decision affirmed the union's right to organise a ballot for protected action, subject to compliance with the legal requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. The employer's objections were dismissed, and the union was permitted to proceed with the ballot as planned.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Icon Corporate Services 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