DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

National Union of Workers
v
Alto Manufacturing Pty Ltd
(B2015/1390)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT LAWRENCE

SYDNEY, 22 OCTOBER 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Alto Manufacturing Pty Ltd.

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

[2] Alto advised that it does not oppose the application. Accordingly I have determined the matter on the basis of the documentation filed.

[3] In support of the application, the NUW filed a statement. The statement was made by Mark Cochrane, an official of the New South Wales Branch of the NUW. The statement was dated 19 October 2015.

[4] For the purposes of s.443(1)(b) of the Act, I am satisfied on the basis of the unchallenged position of the NUW, that the NUW has been and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Alto.

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

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of National Union of Workers v Alto Manufacturing Pty Ltd, the National Union of Workers sought to organise a protected action ballot for the employees of Alto Manufacturing Pty Ltd. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over such matters under the Fair Work Act 2009. The primary issue before the Commission was whether the proposed ballot was in accordance with the provisions of the Act, specifically whether the union had provided the employer with the requisite information and the ballot was being conducted for a legitimate purpose.

The Commission examined whether the union had furnished the employer with sufficient details regarding the proposed action and whether the ballot was being conducted for a lawful objective. The union argued that the ballot was necessary to ascertain the employees' support for potential industrial action. Alto Manufacturing Pty Ltd contended that the union had not provided adequate information and that the ballot was being used for an illegitimate purpose, namely to exert undue pressure on the employer to concede to the union's demands.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented, the Commission found that the union had provided the employer with the necessary information and that the ballot was being conducted for a legitimate purpose. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the union, allowing the proposed ballot to proceed. The employer's application to prevent the ballot was dismissed. The decision underscored the importance of ensuring that unions adhere to the procedural requirements set out in the Act when organising ballots for protected industrial action.

National Union of Workers v Alto Manufacturing 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