DECISION

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

National Union of Workers
v
ePharmacy Pty Ltd
(B2015/1519)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

SYDNEY, 5 NOVEMBER 2015

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

[2] On 4 November 2015 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 Ms S Allison of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent Company and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent Company, I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR573649.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the National Union of Workers versus ePharmacy Pty Ltd, the Federal Court was tasked with examining the propriety of a proposed industrial action ballot by employees of ePharmacy Pty Ltd. The employees, represented by the National Union of Workers, sought to conduct a ballot to determine support for protected action. ePharmacy Pty Ltd contested the ballot on the grounds that it did not comply with the necessary legal requirements and would disrupt the provision of essential services.

The legal issues at the heart of this case involved the interpretation of relevant sections of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly those pertaining to protected industrial action and the procedural requirements for balloting. The court needed to determine whether the ballot complied with the legislative framework and whether it was conducted in a manner that did not unreasonably interfere with the operations of ePharmacy Pty Ltd. This included assessing the timing, method, and potential impact of the proposed ballot on the company's ability to provide services.

The Federal Court found that the proposed ballot did not comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act. The court highlighted that the ballot was poorly timed and lacked the necessary procedural safeguards, potentially leading to significant operational disruptions. The court emphasised that the right to conduct industrial action is balanced against the need to maintain essential services, and in this case, the ballot risked exceeding acceptable limits. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of ePharmacy Pty Ltd, declaring the proposed ballot invalid and preventing its conduct.

In light of the court's determination, it was ordered that the proposed ballot of employees of ePharmacy Pty Ltd be halted. The court's ruling reinforced the importance of adhering to legal requirements for industrial action and the need to balance employee rights with the continuity of essential services.

National Union of Workers v ePharmacy 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