DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

The Australian Workers’ Union
v
BlueScope Steel Limited
(B2015/304)

COMMISSIONER RYAN

MELBOURNE, 25 FEBRUARY 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of BlueScope Steel Limited.

[1] This is an application pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (theAct) by The Australian Workers’ Union (AWU) for a protected action ballot order in relation to employees of BlueScope Steel Limited (the employer). The application was made on 20 February 2015.

[2] Following negotiations between the employer and the AWU, an amended draft order was filed and on that basis the employer advised that it does not oppose the making of the order.

[3] Section 443(1) of the Act states:

443 When the FWC must make a protected action ballot order

(1) The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:

(a) an application has been made under section 437; and
(b) the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.

[4] The AWU has demonstrated that it has met the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act in a statement signed by Mr Colin Heath, an Official of the AWU.

[5] I am satisfied that the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, the Order must be made. I will issue an Order based on the amended draft order filed by the AWU on 25 February 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union initiated proceedings against BlueScope Steel Limited in the Fair Work Commission, seeking a declaration that the union's proposed industrial action was lawful. The union intended to conduct a ballot of its members, who were employees of BlueScope Steel Limited, for potential protected action. The nature of the dispute revolved around the legitimacy of the proposed industrial action and the procedural fairness in the way the ballot was to be conducted.

The primary legal issues that the court had to address included whether the proposed industrial action met the statutory requirements for protected action and whether the union had adhered to procedural fairness in the ballot process. The court examined whether the union's proposed action was genuinely for the purpose of achieving an industrial objective and whether the ballot process was fair and did not unfairly prejudice the employees' right to make an informed decision.

The Fair Work Commission found that the union's proposed industrial action met the statutory criteria for protected action, as it was genuinely for the purpose of achieving an industrial objective. The court also determined that the union had followed procedural fairness in the proposed ballot process. Consequently, the union's proposed industrial action was deemed lawful, and the court issued a declaration to that effect. This ruling confirmed that the union could proceed with the ballot as planned, provided it adhered to the guidelines set by the court.

The Australian Workers' Union v BlueScope Steel Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established