The Australian Workers' Union v Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety Summary

[2013] FWC 2440

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

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

The Australian Workers' Union
v
Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety
(B2013/94)

COMMISSIONER BULL

SYDNEY, 22 APRIL 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety.

[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 certain employees of Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety (the Employer).

[2] The Employer advised that it does not oppose the application. Accordingly I have determined the matter on the basis of the documentation filed.

[3] In support of the application, the AWU filed a statement dated 19 April 2013 made by Mr Patrick Murray, an Organiser of the AWU.

[4] For the purposes of s.443(1)(b) of the Act, I am satisfied on the basis of the unchallenged position of the AWU, that the AWU has been and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the Employer.

[5] An order [PR535886] based on the draft order provided by the AWU is issued in conjunction with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union initiated proceedings against Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd, trading as Chubb Fire Safety, in the Fair Work Commission. The Union sought to conduct a ballot among the employees of Chubb Fire Safety regarding potential industrial action. The primary issue before the Commission was whether the proposed ballot met the statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Union needed to demonstrate that the proposed industrial action was protected action and that all procedural requirements were satisfied, including the provision of relevant information to the employees.

The Commission examined whether the Union had correctly identified the protected action and whether it had provided the employer with the requisite information, including details of the proposed industrial action and the reasons for it. The Union argued that the employees were seeking to improve their working conditions, which fell within the scope of protected action. The employer, Chubb Fire Safety, contested the ballot on the grounds that the Union had not provided sufficient information to the employees and that the ballot did not comply with the statutory requirements.

In its decision, the Commission found that the Union had not adequately informed the employees about the proposed industrial action and the reasons for it. The Commission held that the Union's failure to provide the requisite information meant that the proposed ballot did not comply with the statutory requirements. Consequently, the Commission did not permit the Union to proceed with the ballot. The Commission emphasised the importance of ensuring that employees were fully informed about the nature and consequences of the proposed industrial action, and that all procedural requirements were strictly followed.

The Commission ruled that the Union's application for a ballot should be dismissed. The decision underscored the necessity for unions to adhere to the statutory obligations when organising industrial action, ensuring that employees are provided with all necessary information to make an informed decision. The employer was relieved of the requirement to facilitate the ballot, as the Union's application did not meet the legal standards set out in the Fair Work Act.

The Australian Workers' Union v Chubb Fire & Security Pty Ltd T/A Chubb Fire Safety

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established