DECISION

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

National Union of Workers
v
LD&D Foods Pty Limited
(B2016/1138)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 31 OCTOBER 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of LD&D Foods Pty Limited.

[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 LD&D Foods Pty Limited (the Respondent).

[2] On 28 October 2016 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 Susie 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 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 PR586948.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The National Union of Workers initiated legal proceedings against LD&D Foods Pty Limited in relation to a proposed industrial action ballot among the employees. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission of Australia. The union sought an order mandating the company to conduct a protected action ballot among its employees. LD&D Foods Pty Limited contested the union's request, arguing that the proposed ballot did not meet the criteria for protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed industrial action was of such a nature that it qualified for a protected action ballot under the Fair Work Act. The union contended that the proposed action was protected as it involved a dispute over the employees' terms and conditions of employment. LD&D Foods Pty Limited argued that the proposed action did not constitute a protected action because it did not meet the criteria set out in the Act.

The Commission held that the proposed industrial action did not qualify as protected action under the Fair Work Act. The Commission found that the proposed ballot did not meet the requirements of section 390 of the Act, as the union had not demonstrated that the proposed action was in relation to a genuine dispute over the employees' terms and conditions of employment. The Commission concluded that the proposed action was not of such a nature that it qualified for a protected action ballot. As a result, the union's application for an order mandating the company to conduct a protected action ballot was dismissed.

The Commission did not make any orders in favour of the union, and the company was not required to conduct a protected action ballot among its employees. The decision of the Commission is final and binding, and no further legal action can be taken in relation to this matter.

National Union of Workers v LD&D Foods Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established