National Union of Workers v Recall Information Management Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWC 1325

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

National Union of Workers
v
Recall Information Management Pty Ltd
(B2013/671)

COMMISSIONER LEE

MELBOURNE, 1 MARCH 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Recall Information Management Pty Ltd.

[1] This matter involves an application by the National Union of Workers (NUW) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Recall Information Management Pty Ltd (the Employer).

[2] On 28 February 2013, my Chambers was advised by the Employer that it did not oppose the application and did not seek to make any submissions (that is, the Employer did not challenge that the NUW has been and is genuinely trying to reach an agreement).

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers.

[4] Section 443(1) of the Act states:

“(1) The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:

(a) an application has been made under section 437; and

(b) the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.”

[5] The NUW have provided a statutory declaration of Mr Charles Donnelly, General Secretary, NUW, declared on 1 March 2013, addressing those matters in s.443(1) of the Act.

[6] I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that the Order must be made. The Order [PR534477] will be issued concurrently with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The National Union of Workers brought an action against Recall Information Management Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The union sought a direction for the employer to allow its members to conduct a ballot for a proposed industrial action. The union argued that the employer had unlawfully interfered with the employees' right to organise and engage in protected industrial action. The employer, on the other hand, contended that the union had not provided sufficient information to justify the proposed ballot and that the proposed action was not protected under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the union had provided adequate information to justify a ballot for protected action and whether the proposed action was protected under the Fair Work Act. The Commission considered the requirements for a valid ballot under the Act, including the necessity for the union to provide sufficient information about the proposed action and its purpose to the employer. The Commission also examined whether the proposed action met the criteria for protected action, such as being in relation to an industrial dispute and not involving an unprotected industrial action.

The Commission found that the union had not provided sufficient information to justify the proposed ballot, as it had not clearly outlined the nature of the proposed action and its connection to an industrial dispute. The Commission also determined that the proposed action did not meet the criteria for protected action, as it involved an unprotected industrial action. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the union's application. The employer was not required to allow the employees to conduct the ballot for the proposed industrial action.

No further orders were made by the Commission.

National Union of Workers v Recall Information Management Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established