Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Mines Rescue Pty Ltd Summary

[2022] FWC 2515

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v

Mines Rescue Pty Ltd

(B2022/1391)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 19 SEPTEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Mines Rescue Pty Ltd

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 Mines Rescue Pty Ltd (Respondent).

The Respondent neither consented nor objected to the application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Bob Timbs of the Applicant declared on 15 September 2022, 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 PR746017.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission received an application from the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union, seeking an order under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot in relation to certain employees of Mines Rescue Pty Ltd. The union claimed that it had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Mines Rescue Pty Ltd, but was unable to do so. Mines Rescue Pty Ltd neither consented nor objected to the application. The Vice President determined the matter on the papers, without holding a hearing. The Vice President considered the statutory declaration of Bob Timbs of the union, which detailed the steps taken by the union in bargaining with Mines Rescue Pty Ltd and its efforts to reach an agreement.

The legal issue before the court was whether the union had met the requirements under section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 to hold a protected action ballot. The union argued that it had taken all necessary steps in bargaining with Mines Rescue Pty Ltd and had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement. The court had to determine if the union had met the notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and if it had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with Mines Rescue Pty Ltd. The court found that the union had met the requirements and was satisfied that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement.

In reaching its decision, the court considered the statutory declaration of Bob Timbs of the union, which set out the steps taken by the union in bargaining with Mines Rescue Pty Ltd. The court found that the union had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Mines Rescue Pty Ltd, and that the notification time had been met. Therefore, the court was satisfied that the union had met the requirements under section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 to hold a protected action ballot. An order was issued in PR746017, granting the union's application for a protected action ballot order.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Mines Rescue Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established