DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

National Union of Workers
v
Vitasoy Australia Products Pty Ltd
(B2017/791)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 4 SEPTEMBER 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Vitasoy Australia Products 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 Vitasoy Australia Products Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 4 September 2017 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 Mr D Melling 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 PR595832.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved the National Union of Workers challenging a decision by Vitasoy Australia Products Pty Ltd to prevent its employees from participating in a proposed ballot for protected industrial action. The union sought an order that the company allow the ballot to proceed and that the company cease its interference with the union's activities. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the legality of the company's actions in obstructing the ballot.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether Vitasoy Australia Products Pty Ltd had acted in a manner that interfered with the employees' right to engage in protected industrial action by preventing them from participating in the ballot organised by the union. This involved assessing the company's actions under the Fair Work Act 2009 and understanding the extent to which employers can lawfully influence or restrict union activities related to industrial action.

The Fair Work Commission found that Vitasoy Australia Products Pty Ltd had indeed interfered with the union's activities by preventing employees from participating in the ballot. The Commission ruled that such actions constituted an unlawful interference with the employees' right to engage in protected industrial action. Consequently, the Commission ordered the company to cease its interference, allow the ballot to proceed, and compensate the union for the costs incurred due to the company's actions.

National Union of Workers v Vitasoy Australia Products 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