| [2025] FWC 2367 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
Nathanael Timothy Bishop
v
Lumus Imaging (Queensland) Pty Ltd
(B2025/1278)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON | ADELAIDE, 13 AUGUST 2025 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Lumus Imaging (Queensland) Pty Ltd
This is an application by Nathanael Timothy Bishop (Mr Bishop or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Lumus Imaging (Queensland) Pty Ltd (Lumus or Employer).
On 12 August 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer, in effect, did not object to the Application.
I observe that following the Commission raising some inconsistencies between the application and the draft order, revised documents were provided by Mr Bishop. In the circumstances, I have decided to grant leave to amend the application and determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.
On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Mr Bishop, Radiographer, setting out the steps taken by himself in bargaining with the Employer and that he has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Lumus, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.
The ballot is to be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).
For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 24 September 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.
An Order has been separately issued in PR790644.
This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
[1] This is, in effect, 30 working days from the making of the Order and is the minimum period required by the AEC to conduct a ballot of this nature.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR790645>
- AGLC
- Nathanael Timothy Bishop v Lumus Imaging (Queensland) Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 2367
- Case
- [2025] FWC 2367
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission included whether Mr Bishop had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with Lumus, whether a notification time was in place for the proposed agreement, and if all requirements under section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act had been met. Based on Mr Bishop's declaration and the steps he took in bargaining with the employer, the Deputy President found that Mr Bishop had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement and that all statutory requirements were fulfilled.
Accordingly, the Deputy President granted the application and ordered that the ballot be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission. The voting period was set to close on 24 September 2025, which aligns with the minimum period required by the Electoral Commission to conduct such a ballot. Furthermore, the Commission scheduled a compulsory conciliation conference under section 448A of the Act, to be conducted by another member, to ensure that meaningful negotiations occur between the parties. This decision allows the employees to express their views on the proposed agreement through a formal ballot process.
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.