DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

National Union of Workers
v
Turosi Pty Ltd
(B2019/1136)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 25 SEPTEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Turosi 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 Turosi Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 25 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 Dilek Tiauli 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 PR712792.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute between the National Union of Workers and Turosi Pty Ltd was brought before the court in an application for an injunction. The union sought to conduct a protected action ballot among the employees of Turosi Pty Ltd. The company opposed the ballot, arguing that it was not appropriately structured according to the relevant industrial laws. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The court was required to determine whether the union's proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. This included assessing whether the ballot notice provided by the union was sufficient and whether the ballot was called for a lawful purpose. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether the employer's opposition was justified and whether an injunction should be granted to prevent the union from proceeding with the ballot.

The court found that the union's ballot notice did not meet the statutory requirements as it failed to include all necessary information and did not comply with the form prescribed by the regulations. The court concluded that the ballot was not properly called, and the employer's opposition was valid. As a result, the court granted an injunction preventing the union from conducting the ballot. The court's decision was based on the strict adherence to procedural requirements under the Fair Work Act, emphasising the importance of precise compliance with the law to maintain industrial relations fairness.

The court's final orders included an injunction that restrained the union from proceeding with the proposed ballot until it complied with the necessary legal requirements. The union was directed to revise the ballot notice and recommence the process in accordance with the law, if it chose to do so. The employer's concerns regarding the adequacy of the notice and the lawfulness of the ballot were thus addressed by the court's ruling.

National Union of Workers v Turosi 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