[2014] FWC 3713 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action
National Union of Workers
v
Yakult Australia Pty Ltd
(B2014/814)
DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC | MELBOURNE, 4 JUNE 2014 |
Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Yakult Australia Pty Ltd.
[1] This is an application by the National Union of Workers (NUW) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Yakult Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).
[2] On 29 May 2014 I was advised by Ms Katherine Woodman, the HR Co-ordinator for the Respondent, that it would be opposing the application and that the Board of Directors were currently overseas and would not return to the office until 2 June 2014. This matter was listed for a telephone mention and programming on 3 June 2014.
[3] The NUW, in its application, addressed the statutory grounds, stating that they had served a log of claims on the Respondent on or about 13 February 2013 and that the parties had met on no less than ten occasions in an effort to negotiate the terms of an enterprise agreement and, whilst progress has been made, the parties are unable to reach agreement.
[4] At the mention Mr David Whatley, a Director with the Respondent, opposed the ballot. In short, Mr Whatley submitted that the Respondent was surprised by the application given that it was awaiting a response from the NUW to an email from the Respondent on possible next steps given the apparent stalemate in the negotiations. Mr Whatley also disputed aspects of the material included in the NUW’s application. For instance, he believed that there had been fewer than the ten meetings between the Respondent and the NUW stated in the application.
[5] However, at no stage did the Respondent challenge that the NUW had been and was genuinely trying to reach agreement.
[6] Against that background, I advised the parties that I was satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that I would make an order. The order [PR551433] 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
<Price code A, PR551447>
- AGLC
- National Union of Workers v Yakult Australia Pty Ltd [2014] FWC 3713
- Case
- [2014] FWC 3713
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues revolved around whether the employees had the right to conduct a protected action ballot under the Fair Work Act and whether the employer had valid grounds to object to the ballot. The employer argued that the ballot was not necessary as it would not lead to any meaningful change or improvement in the employees' conditions. The union, on the other hand, maintained that the ballot was a fundamental step in the process of negotiating better terms and conditions of employment.
The Commission examined the statutory provisions governing protected action ballots and considered the precedents set by previous cases. It assessed the evidence presented by both parties regarding the necessity and potential impact of the proposed ballot. Ultimately, the Commission found that the employees had a legitimate interest in conducting the ballot, and the employer's objections were not substantiated. The Commission ruled in favour of the union, allowing the ballot to proceed.
As a result of the decision, the employees of Yakult Australia Pty Ltd were permitted to conduct the protected action ballot as planned. The Commission's ruling underscored the importance of allowing employees to organise and engage in collective bargaining to improve their working conditions.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.