The Australian Workers' Union v Isis Central Sugar Mill Company Limited Summary

[2023] FWC 1104

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

The Australian Workers' Union
v

Isis Central Sugar Mill Company Limited

(B2023/411)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 9 MAY 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Isis Central Sugar Mill Company Limited

This is an application by the Australian Workers' Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Isis Central Sugar Mill Company Limited (Respondent).

On 8 May 2023, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Bronson Thomas of the Applicant declared on 4 May 2023, 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 PR761769.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union (AWU) applied to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of the Isis Central Sugar Mill Company Limited. The AWU sought to conduct a ballot of its members to determine whether to proceed with protected industrial action against the company due to the failure to reach an agreement during negotiations. The company did not oppose the application.

The primary legal issue the FWC had to address was whether the AWU had fulfilled the conditions set out in section 443(1) of the Act, which includes the requirement of a notification time and demonstrating that it had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with the company. The FWC also had to consider whether the AWU had provided sufficient evidence to warrant the granting of a ballot order.

The FWC found that the AWU had satisfied the conditions under section 443(1) of the Act. The evidence, including the statutory declaration of Bronson Thomas, confirmed that the union had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with the company and had complied with the notification time requirements. Therefore, the FWC determined to proceed with the matter without a hearing and issued the Order. This decision allows the AWU to proceed with a ballot to determine whether to take protected industrial action.

The Fair Work Commission issued an Order allowing the Australian Workers' Union to conduct a ballot of its members regarding the proposed industrial action. The company did not oppose the application, and the FWC was satisfied that the union had met the necessary requirements under the Fair Work Act. The decision is significant as it provides the union with the legal authority to proceed with its planned industrial action, subject to the outcome of the ballot.

The Australian Workers' Union v Isis Central Sugar Mill Company Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established