National Union of Workers v Ricegrowers Limited

[2014] FWC 5039

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

National Union of Workers
v
Ricegrowers Limited
(B2014/988)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC

MELBOURNE, 25 JULY 2014

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Ricegrowers Ltd.

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

[2] The National Union of Workers has provided a Statutory Declaration addressing the statutory grounds. That Statutory Declaration makes it clear that the parties have met on approximately four occasions for varying periods of up to three days since 26 February 2014 in an effort to negotiate the terms of an enterprise agreement and, whilst progress has been made, the parties are unable to reach agreement. A further meeting occurred on 23 July 2014.

[3] On 25 July 2014 I was advised by Mr Liam Burns, Senior Human Resources Manager that the Respondent will not oppose the application made by the NUW. In doing so, the Respondent did not challenge that the NUW had been and was genuinely trying to reach agreement in respect of either site.

[4] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

[5] On the basis of the material before me, I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met. Accordingly, I will make an order. The order [PR553572] is based on the draft order provided by the NUW and will be issued in conjunction with this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved a dispute between the National Union of Workers and Ricegrowers Limited. The union sought to conduct a ballot of its members, who were employees of Ricegrowers Limited, to determine if they would support protected action, specifically a strike. Ricegrowers Limited challenged the union's right to conduct such a ballot. The dispute was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the union had complied with the necessary legal requirements to conduct a lawful ballot and if the proposed ballot would infringe upon the rights of non-union members among the employees. The court needed to determine if the union's actions were consistent with the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly regarding the procedures for protected actions and the rights of employees who were not members of the union.

The court considered the union's right to organise and conduct a ballot under the Fair Work Act, weighing this against the rights of non-union members to not be compelled to participate in union activities. The court examined the specifics of the ballot, including the wording and distribution of the ballot papers, to ensure they were clear and did not mislead or coerce employees. Ultimately, the court found that the union had conducted the ballot in accordance with the law, and the rights of non-union members were not infringed upon. Therefore, the court ruled in favour of the union, allowing the ballot to proceed as planned.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established