DECISION

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

National Union of Workers
v
Ego Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd
(B2017/550)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 3 JULY 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Ego Pharmaceuticals 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 Ego Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 3 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 PR594198.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved the National Union of Workers, representing employees of Ego Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd, and the pharmaceutical company itself. The dispute centred on a proposed industrial action ballot by the union, seeking to authorise a protected action by the employees. Ego Pharmaceuticals opposed the ballot, arguing that the ballot notice was deficient and that the proposed action would cause significant financial harm to the company and potentially compromise patient safety.

The key legal issues before the Commission were whether the ballot notice was compliant with the necessary legal requirements and whether the proposed action constituted a protected action under the Fair Work Act. The Commission had to consider whether the ballot notice provided sufficient information to the employees and whether the proposed industrial action was for a genuine industrial purpose. Additionally, the Commission needed to weigh the potential harm to Ego Pharmaceuticals against the employees' right to take protected industrial action.

The Commission found that the ballot notice was, in fact, compliant with the legal requirements as it contained sufficient information for the employees to make an informed decision. The proposed action was deemed to be for a genuine industrial purpose, as it related to the employees' working conditions. The Commission acknowledged the potential harm to Ego Pharmaceuticals but concluded that the employees' right to take protected action outweighed the company's interests in this instance. As a result, the Commission approved the ballot and allowed the proposed industrial action to proceed.

In light of the findings, the Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed industrial action ballot be conducted in accordance with the union's notice, allowing the employees to vote on the proposed action. The Commission did not grant an injunction to prevent the ballot or the industrial action, recognising the employees' right to engage in protected action under the Fair Work Act.

National Union of Workers v Ego Pharmaceuticals 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