National Union of Workers v Vinidex Pty Limited Summary

[2017] FWC 2944

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

National Union of Workers

Vinidex Pty Limited

(B2017/428)

Deputy President Gostencnik

SYDNEY, 29 MAY 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Vinidex Pty Limited.

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

On 29 May 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr J Dixon 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.

An order has been separately issued in PR593313.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of National Union of Workers v Vinidex Pty Limited involved a dispute between the union and the employer regarding a proposed protected action ballot of employees. The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was tasked with determining whether the union's proposed industrial action was protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The employer, Vinidex Pty Limited, sought an order preventing the union from proceeding with the ballot.

The primary legal issue before the FWC was whether the proposed industrial action, which involved a ban on the supply of goods to a third party, constituted protected action. The FWC needed to determine whether the proposed action met the criteria set out in the Fair Work Act, specifically whether it was in relation to a "workplace matter" and related to the employees' terms and conditions of employment. Additionally, the FWC needed to consider whether the action was conducted in accordance with the procedural requirements outlined in the Act.

The FWC held that the proposed industrial action was protected action. The Commission found that the employees' action related to their terms and conditions of employment, specifically in relation to the supply of goods to a third party. The FWC noted that the proposed action was in response to a perceived breach of an agreement between the union and the employer and was conducted in good faith. The FWC also found that the union had complied with the procedural requirements for protected action, including providing the employer with the required notice and information. As a result, the employer's application to prevent the union from proceeding with the ballot was dismissed.

The FWC's decision highlights the importance of unions and employers adhering to the procedural requirements for protected action set out in the Fair Work Act. The Commission's finding that the proposed industrial action was protected action reinforces the rights of employees to engage in lawful industrial action in pursuit of their workplace rights.

National Union of Workers v Vinidex Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established