DECISION

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

The Australian Workers' Union
v
Boral Cement Limited
(B2018/527)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 3 JULY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Boral Cement Limited.

[1] 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 Boral Cement Limited (Respondent).

[2] On 2 July 2018 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 W Phillips 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 PR608676.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union initiated legal proceedings against Boral Cement Limited in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centres around a proposed ballot of Boral Cement Limited's employees to take protected industrial action. The union sought an order requiring the company to facilitate the ballot. The company opposed the union's application, arguing that the ballot was not genuinely related to industrial matters but rather to a political cause, thereby rendering it unprotected under Australian labour law.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the proposed ballot for industrial action was genuinely related to industrial matters, as required by the Fair Work Act 2009. The union contended that the ballot was genuinely related to industrial matters because it involved employees seeking better pay and conditions. Boral Cement Limited, however, argued that the ballot was motivated by a political agenda unrelated to industrial matters, and thus not protected by the Act. The Court had to determine the genuineness of the industrial connection in the context of the employees' proposed action.

The Court considered the purpose and nature of the proposed ballot and the context in which it was being held. It examined whether the proposed industrial action was genuinely related to the employees' employment or intended employment. The Court found that the ballot was genuinely related to industrial matters as it concerned the employees' wages, conditions, and other terms and circumstances of employment. Consequently, the Court ruled in favour of the union, ordering Boral Cement Limited to facilitate the proposed ballot. The Court's decision underscores the importance of the genuine connection between the proposed industrial action and the employees' employment or intended employment under the Fair Work Act.

The Australian Workers' Union v Boral Cement Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established