National Union of Workers Summary

[2014] FWC 4597

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

National Union of Workers
(B2014/148)

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN

SYDNEY, 14 JULY 2014

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of New Food Coating Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application made pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by National Union of Workers (NUW). It seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of New Food Coating Pty Ltd (the Employer).

[2] The Employer advised that it opposes the application. Accordingly I have determined the matter on the basis of the evidence submitted.

[3] In support of the application, the NUW filed a statement dated 7 July 2014 made by Mr Ron Herbert, an Official of the NUW. The Respondent relied upon a witness statement of Louise Walker, Human Resources Manager.

[4] I adjourned the proceedings on 10 July, 2014, to allow for a further meeting between the parties.

[5] For the purposes of s.443(1)(b) of the Act, I am satisfied on the basis of the evidence provided by the NUW, that the NUW has been, and continues to be, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the Employer.

[6] An order [PR552935] based on the draft order provided by the NUW is issued in conjunction with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The National Union of Workers brought an application before the Federal Court of Australia on behalf of employees of New Food Coating Pty Ltd. The union sought authorisation for a protected action ballot among the employees to explore potential industrial action due to unresolved disputes regarding their employment conditions. The employer contested the ballot, arguing that it would be unlawful as it did not comply with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the union's proposed ballot met the statutory requirements for a protected action ballot under the Fair Work Act. This included assessing whether the ballot related to a genuine industrial issue and whether the union had followed the prescribed procedures. The court had to determine if the proposed ballot was a reasonable step to facilitate discussions about unresolved workplace issues.

In delivering its judgment, the court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The court held that the proposed ballot was necessary and appropriate to address the genuine industrial issues raised by the employees. The union had demonstrated that it had followed the necessary procedures and that the ballot was intended to facilitate discussions to resolve the disputes. Consequently, the court authorised the union to proceed with the ballot, confirming that it complied with the statutory requirements. The employer's application to prevent the ballot was dismissed.

National Union of Workers

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established