DECISION

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

National Union of Workers
v
Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd
(B2017/752)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 22 AUGUST 2017

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

[2] On 22 August 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 D Melling 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 PR595523.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The National Union of Workers brought proceedings against Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The Union sought an order that Fonterra provide information necessary to enable the Union to conduct a ballot of its members regarding protected action. The Union claimed that Fonterra had failed to provide sufficient information to its employees to allow the Union to conduct a lawful ballot. Fonterra opposed the application, arguing that it had provided all necessary information and that the Union's request was unreasonable.

The Commission was required to determine whether Fonterra had provided sufficient information to enable the Union to conduct a lawful ballot. The Commission also needed to decide whether the Union's request for additional information was reasonable. The key issue was whether the information provided by Fonterra was sufficient for the Union to conduct a lawful ballot under the Fair Work Act.

The Commission found that Fonterra had provided sufficient information for the Union to conduct a lawful ballot. The Commission held that the information provided by Fonterra was adequate to enable the Union to conduct a ballot in accordance with the Fair Work Act. The Commission further found that the Union's request for additional information was unreasonable and not necessary for the purposes of conducting a lawful ballot. The Commission dismissed the Union's application.

The Commission made no orders as the Union's application was dismissed. The Commission held that Fonterra had provided sufficient information to enable the Union to conduct a lawful ballot and that the Union's request for additional information was unreasonable.

National Union of Workers v Fonterra 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