The Australian Workers' Union v BlueScope Steel Limited

[2018] FWC 4498

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

The Australian Workers' Union

BlueScope Steel Limited

(B2018/657)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 31 JULY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of BlueScope Steel Limited.

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

On 31 July 2018 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 P Farrow 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 PR609579.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union sought to conduct a protected action ballot of employees of BlueScope Steel Limited. BlueScope Steel Limited challenged the union's right to conduct the ballot, arguing that it was not authorised by the employees and that the ballot itself was unlawful. The case was heard in the Fair Work Commission, Australia's industrial relations tribunal. The central legal issues in the case were whether the union had the authority to conduct the ballot and whether the ballot itself was lawful. The union argued that it had the authority to conduct the ballot as it had been authorised by the employees and that the ballot was a lawful means of gauging employee support for potential industrial action. BlueScope Steel Limited contended that the union had not obtained the necessary authorisation from the employees and that the ballot was therefore unlawful.

The Fair Work Commission found in favour of BlueScope Steel Limited, holding that the union had not obtained the necessary authorisation from the employees to conduct the ballot. The Commission found that the union's ballot notice did not provide sufficient information to the employees about the nature and purpose of the ballot, and that the ballot itself was therefore unlawful. The Commission further held that the union had not taken reasonable steps to ensure that the employees were adequately informed about the ballot, and that the ballot was therefore not authorised by the employees. The Commission ordered that the union cease and desist from conducting the ballot and from taking any further action in relation to the ballot. The Commission also ordered that the union pay BlueScope Steel Limited's costs of the proceedings.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established