DECISION

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

National Union of Workers
v
ContiTech Australia Pty Ltd
(B2017/571)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 10 JULY 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of ContiTech Australia Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the National Union of Workers (the Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of ContiTech Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 10 July 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr C Bechaz of the Applicant 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 PR594436.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of National Union of Workers versus ContiTech Australia Pty Ltd involved a dispute regarding a proposed protected action ballot of the employees of ContiTech Australia Pty Ltd. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's workplace relations tribunal. The National Union of Workers sought authorisation for the ballot, which aimed to gauge employee support for potential industrial action, arguing that the action was protected under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The legal issues before the Commission centred on whether the proposed industrial action was protected action under the Act and if the ballot was conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions. The employer contested the validity of the ballot on several grounds, including the appropriateness of the ballot questions and the manner in which the ballot was conducted. The Commission needed to determine if the ballot complied with the procedural requirements and if it was likely to result in protected action as defined by the Act.

The Fair Work Commission examined the specific questions posed in the ballot, the processes followed in conducting the ballot, and the employer's objections. The Commission found that the ballot questions were appropriately framed and that the process was conducted in a manner that adhered to the statutory requirements. The employer's concerns regarding the potential impact on business operations and customer confidence did not outweigh the statutory right to conduct a ballot for protected action. The Commission authorised the proposed ballot, confirming that it was a lawful and protected action under the Fair Work Act.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission granted the authorisation for the proposed protected action ballot of the employees of ContiTech Australia Pty Ltd. The decision confirmed the union's right to conduct the ballot and highlighted the importance of following the statutory procedures when seeking employee support for industrial action.

National Union of Workers v ContiTech Australia 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