DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union
v
The Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd T/A The Griffin Coal Mining Company
(B2021/521)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 12 JULY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of The Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd T/A The Griffin Coal Mining Company.

[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 The Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd T/A The Griffin Coal Mining Company (Respondent).

[2] On 9 July 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 Greg Busson of the Applicant declared on 8 July 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 PR731601.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and the Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd, trading as The Griffin Coal Mining Company. The dispute centred around a proposed protected action ballot of the employees, which was a form of industrial action. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission of Australia.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the proposed ballot was lawful under the Fair Work Act 2009, and if the employer had adequately notified the employees and the union of the ballot. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the employer had complied with the notice requirements stipulated in the Act, and whether the notice given was sufficient and in the prescribed form. Additionally, the court examined whether the employer had acted in good faith and whether the ballot was being used as a pretext for an unprotected industrial action.

The court ruled that the employer had not complied with the notice requirements under the Fair Work Act. The notice provided by the employer was deemed insufficient and not in the prescribed form, leading the court to conclude that the employer had not acted in good faith. Consequently, the proposed ballot was found to be unlawful. The court emphasised the importance of following the notice requirements to ensure that employees and unions are properly informed and can exercise their rights effectively. The court's decision was grounded in the principle that compliance with the statutory notice provisions is crucial to maintaining a fair industrial relations environment.

Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union v The Griffin Coal Mining Company Pty Ltd T/A the Griffin Coal Mining Company

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established