DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

National Union of Workers
v
PFD Food Services Pty Ltd
(B2019/724)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 2 SEPTEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of PFD Food Services Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the National Union of Workers (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of PFD Food Services Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 2 September 2019, 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 PR711944.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of National Union of Workers versus PFD Food Services Pty Ltd was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The National Union of Workers sought a declaration that the proposed protected action ballot of employees of PFD Food Services Pty Ltd, a food processing company, was lawful and valid. The ballot was intended to give employees the opportunity to vote on industrial action in response to disputes over their employment conditions.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the ballot was properly organised and whether the union had correctly complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the union had provided sufficient information to the employees and whether the ballot had been conducted in a manner that was fair and did not mislead or prejudice the employees.

The Commission found that the union had fulfilled its obligations under the Fair Work Act. The ballot was organised in a manner that was procedurally fair and provided employees with the necessary information to make an informed decision. The union had taken reasonable steps to ensure that the ballot was conducted in a manner that did not mislead or prejudice employees, and therefore, the ballot was valid. The Commission concluded that the union had acted within its legal rights and that the proposed protected action ballot was lawful.

As a result, the Commission made a declaration that the proposed protected action ballot was lawful and valid. The decision reinforced the importance of unions providing adequate information to their members and conducting ballots in a fair and transparent manner. The outcome of this case will likely guide unions in future disputes over the organisation of ballots and protected industrial action.

National Union of Workers v PFD Food Services 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