The Australian Workers' Union v Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd T/A CHC Helicopter (Australia) Summary

[2023] FWC 238

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

The Australian Workers' Union
v

Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd T/A CHC Helicopter (Australia)

(B2023/48)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 25 JANUARY 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd T/A CHC Helicopter (Australia)

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 Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd T/A CHC Helicopter (Australia) (Respondent).

On 25 January 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 Douglas Charles Heath of the Applicant declared on 23 January 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 PR750013.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union (AWU) made an application to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, seeking an order to hold a protected action ballot for certain employees of Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd, trading as CHC Helicopter (Australia). The FWC was notified that Lloyd Helicopters did not oppose the application, leading to the decision being made without a hearing. The matter was determined based on the information presented, including a statutory declaration from Douglas Charles Heath of the AWU, which outlined the union's efforts in bargaining with the employer and its genuine attempts to reach an agreement.

The primary legal issues before the FWC were whether the notification period for the proposed agreement had elapsed and if the AWU had satisfied the requirements set out in section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act. The FWC needed to assess if the union had genuinely been trying to reach an agreement with the employer and if the statutory notification period had passed, thereby justifying the holding of a ballot for protected industrial action.

In its decision, the FWC was satisfied that the AWU had fulfilled its obligations under the Act, including the genuine attempt to reach an agreement with Lloyd Helicopters. The FWC also confirmed that the notification period for the proposed agreement had ended, fulfilling the conditions for proceeding with a ballot. Given the union's efforts and the completion of the notification period, the FWC granted the application for a protected action ballot.

The Fair Work Commission issued an order allowing the AWU to hold a ballot for protected action among the specified employees of Lloyd Helicopters. This decision underscores the FWC's role in facilitating fair work practices and ensuring that both employers and unions adhere to the legal requirements set out in the Fair Work Act.

The Australian Workers' Union v Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd T/A CHC Helicopter (Australia)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established