DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

National Union of Workers
v
Tatura Milk Industries Limited
(B2016/658)

COMMISSIONER RYAN

MELBOURNE, 1 JULY 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Tatura Milk Industries Limited.

[1] This is an application pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (theAct) by National Union of Workers (NUW) for a protected action ballot order in relation to employees of Tatura Milk Industries Limited (the Respondent). The application was made on 24 June 2016.

[2] The Respondent objected to one of the questions proposed by the NUW in its application:

“An unlimited number bans on paperwork of indefinite duration?”

[3] The NUW sought leave to amend its application and draft order so as to remove that question. The Commission has permitted the NUW to amend its application and draft order.

[4] The Respondent advised the Commission that the application, as amended, was not opposed.

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

443 When the FWC must make a protected action ballot order

(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.

[6] I am satisfied that the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, the Order must be made. I will issue an Order based on the draft order provided by the NUW, so amended.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of National Union of Workers versus Tatura Milk Industries Limited was heard before the Fair Work Commission, where the Union sought to conduct a ballot of employees for potential protected industrial action. The dispute arose from a breakdown in negotiations between the Union and the company regarding the terms of employment for the workers.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed ballot for industrial action complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if the Union's ballot notice was sufficiently detailed and provided the employer with adequate information to respond appropriately. The company argued that the notice did not meet the statutory requirements and was therefore invalid.

The Commission examined the provisions of the Fair Work Act and relevant case law to assess the sufficiency of the Union's ballot notice. The Commission concluded that the notice provided by the Union was not sufficiently detailed to meet the legislative requirements. The notice lacked critical information necessary for the employer to effectively respond to the proposed industrial action, which included the specific nature of the proposed action and the dates on which it was intended to occur. As a result, the Commission ruled that the ballot was invalid and could not proceed as proposed. The Union's application for authorisation of the proposed protected action was dismissed.

National Union of Workers v Tatura Milk Industries Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established