Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWC 1443


[2016] FWC 1443
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.448 - Application for revocation of protected action ballot order

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union
v
Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd
(B2016/344)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 4 MARCH 2016

Application to revoke order made in B2016/257.

[1] Pursuant to s.448 of the Fair Work Act 2009 and upon the application by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, the Order of the Fair Work Commission dated 9 February 2016 [PR576900] is hereby revoked.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR577709>

Details
AGLC
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd [2016] FWC 1443
Case
[2016] FWC 1443
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union sought to revoke an order made in a previous case, B2016/257, which related to industrial action taken by the union against Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd. The union argued that the previous order was no longer necessary and that the matter should be resolved through negotiations. The employer, Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd, opposed the application, maintaining that the order was still valid and necessary to protect its business operations.

The legal issues before the Commission centred on whether the conditions that warranted the original order had changed sufficiently to warrant its revocation. Specifically, the Commission had to determine whether there was a need for continued protection of the employer's business operations and whether the union's industrial action had ceased or was likely to cease. The Commission also had to consider the impact of any revocation on the employer's ability to operate its business and the potential for further industrial action.

In delivering its decision, the Commission found that the conditions that led to the original order had indeed changed. The union's industrial action had ceased, and there was no evidence of further action being planned. The Commission determined that the employer's business operations were no longer at risk due to the union's actions. Consequently, the Commission revoked the order, concluding that it was no longer necessary to protect the employer's business. The Commission emphasised the importance of returning to negotiations as the primary means of resolving industrial disputes.

The Commission ordered the revocation of the order made in B2016/257, effective immediately. The parties were directed to resume negotiations in good faith to resolve any remaining issues. The decision highlighted the Commission's role in balancing the rights of employers and employees while promoting the resolution of disputes through negotiation.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.