| [2017] FWC 6507 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
National Union of Workers
v
Linfox Australia Pty Ltd
(B2017/1167)
| Deputy President Colman | MELBOURNE, 6 DECEMBER 2017 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Linfox Australia Pty Ltd.
This decision concerns an application by the National Union of Workers (the Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Linfox Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).
On 5 December 2017, the Respondent advised my associate that it objected to the application. I listed the matter for hearing on 6 December 2017.
At the hearing, the Respondent explained that its objection was confined to the question of the scope of the group of employees to be balloted, and to clause 3 of the Draft Order. It contended that the application appeared properly to relate only to its employees working at the Coles Regional Distribution Centre in Truganina, Victoria. In this regard, one of the issues between the parties in bargaining concerns the NUW’s pursuit of a site-specific agreement at Truganina, and the company’s claim for a national agreement. The Applicant confirmed that its application sought only to ballot employees of the Respondent at the Coles Regional Distribution Centre in Truganina, Victoria and confirmed that it agreed to amend the Draft Order accordingly.
I have considered the application and the statutory declaration of Ms Alycia Economidis, an Organiser of the Applicant, setting out the steps taken by the Applicant to try to reach agreement with the Respondent.
I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement, that the Applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent, and that the other requirements for the making of a protected action ballot order have been met.
Accordingly, the Commission is required under s.443 of the Act to make a protected action ballot order.
An order has been separately issued in PR598432.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Appearances:
Mr D. Mujkic for the NUW
Mr K. Blake for Linfox Australia Pty Ltd
Hearing details:
2017
Melbourne
6 December
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR598434>
- AGLC
- National Union of Workers v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd [2017] FWC 6507
- Case
- [2017] FWC 6507
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The FWC assessed the union's application and determined that the proposed protected action was not genuinely for the purpose of a trade dispute because it included employees who had no direct interest in the issues being contested. The Commission found that the proposed ballot was not necessary to achieve a lawful objective as it was not limited to employees directly involved in the dispute. Consequently, the FWC rejected the union's application. The decision underscored the importance of ensuring that protected action ballots are limited to employees directly involved in the trade dispute to maintain fairness and relevance in the industrial relations process. The FWC did not grant the union's application, effectively preventing the proposed ballot from proceeding.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.