The Australian Workers' Union v Ventia (Australia) Pty Ltd

[2023] FWC 300

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

The Australian Workers' Union
v

Ventia (Australia) Pty Ltd

(B2023/74)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 3 FEBRUARY 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Ventia (Australia) Pty Ltd

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 Ventia (Australia) Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 2 February 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 Chris Newbold of the Applicant declared on 1 February 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 PR750220.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union (AWU) filed an application under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) seeking a protected action ballot order concerning specific employees of Ventia (Australia) Pty Ltd (Ventia). The application was made in relation to proposed industrial action by the employees. The Respondent, Ventia, did not oppose the application, leading to the matter being decided on the papers without a hearing.

The legal issues that the FWC had to address included whether the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met and if the requirements outlined in section 443(1) of the Act had been satisfied. The AWU had to demonstrate that it had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement with Ventia and that it had taken the necessary steps to do so. The evidence presented by the AWU in support of the application included a statutory declaration by Chris Newbold, which detailed the bargaining process and efforts to reach an agreement.

In making the decision, the FWC considered the material before it, including the statutory declaration. The Commission was satisfied that the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met and that the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act had been fulfilled. Consequently, the FWC determined to grant the AWU's application for a protected action ballot order.

An order was separately issued in PR750220, granting the AWU the right to conduct a protected action ballot among the employees of Ventia. This decision allows the union to proceed with the ballot, provided it adheres to the guidelines and processes set forth in the Fair Work Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established