DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v
Queensland Bulk Handling Pty Ltd
(B2019/1315)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 19 NOVEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Queensland Bulk Handling 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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Queensland Bulk Handling Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 18 November 2019, 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 Shane Brunker 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 PR714404.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union versus Queensland Bulk Handling Pty Ltd, the Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the union could proceed with a proposed industrial action ballot. The employees of Queensland Bulk Handling Pty Ltd were seeking to engage in protected action, and the union sought to organise a ballot to ascertain their members' support for such action. The company contested the union's right to conduct the ballot, raising several objections.

The primary legal issues before the commission were whether the union had provided sufficient information to its members to enable them to make an informed decision about participating in the ballot, and whether the proposed ballot complied with the relevant legislative requirements. The commission had to examine the materials provided to the members, including the ballot paper, the explanatory letter, and the industrial action notice, to determine if they contained all necessary information and were accurately presented.

The Fair Work Commission found that the union had not provided its members with all the required information to make an informed decision. The explanatory letter did not include all the statutory information that must be provided to employees before a ballot can be held. Consequently, the commission ruled that the union could not proceed with the ballot. The company's objections were upheld, and the commission dismissed the union's application to hold the ballot.

The commission ordered that the union was not permitted to conduct the proposed ballot until it provided its members with all the necessary information as required by law. This decision highlights the importance of ensuring that all statutory requirements are met before proceeding with any industrial action ballot.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v Queensland Bulk Handling 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