The Australian Workers' Union v Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd

Case [2013] FWC 8640


[2013] FWC 8640

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

The Australian Workers' Union
v
Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd
(B2013/274)

COMMISSIONER HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 1 NOVEMBER 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Australian Workers’ Union (AWU). It seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd (the Employer) in the Cooper Basin.

[2] The employer has advised the Commission 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 30 October 2013 made by Mr Peter Lamps, National Vice President and Organiser of the AWU. This statement addresses the requirements for the making of a protected action ballot order in relation to relevant employees.

[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 applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the Employer. I am also satisfied that the application has been validly made and all of the relevant requirements of the Act for the making of the order exist in this case.

[5] An order [PR544093] based on the draft order provided by the AWU is issued in conjunction with this decision.

[6] I would remind both parties that the Commission is available to assist with bargaining disputes in accordance with s.240 and the good faith bargaining obligations of s.228 of the Act continue to apply.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR544092>

Details
AGLC
The Australian Workers' Union v Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd [2013] FWC 8640
Case
[2013] FWC 8640
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union sought to conduct a ballot for protected action among employees of Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd. Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd opposed the ballot, leading to a dispute in the Federal Court of Australia. The union aimed to determine the eligibility of its members to engage in protected industrial action, while Spotless argued that certain conditions for such action were not met.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the union's proposed ballot complied with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the court had to examine whether the ballot was about protected action as defined by the Act, and if the union had followed the proper procedures in seeking to conduct the ballot. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether the union had provided Spotless with the requisite information and whether the union's members had already engaged in unprotected industrial action that might affect the ballot's validity.

The court found that the union's proposed ballot did not comply with the statutory requirements for protected action. It held that the ballot was not about protected action as defined by the Fair Work Act because the union had not sufficiently demonstrated that the members had already engaged in unprotected action. Moreover, the court noted procedural deficiencies in the union's approach, including the failure to provide Spotless with adequate information about the proposed ballot. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of Spotless, preventing the union from proceeding with the ballot.

The Federal Court of Australia ordered that the proposed ballot by the Australian Workers' Union be disallowed, and it granted Spotless Facility Services Pty Ltd the relief sought in its application. The union was enjoined from conducting the ballot and was directed to comply with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.