The Australian Workers' Union v Viterra Limited Summary

[2013] FWC 6734

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.448—Protected action

The Australian Workers’ Union
v
Viterra Limited
(B2013/1194)

COMMISSIONER LEWIN

MELBOURNE, 10 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application to revoke order made in B2013/1176.

[1] On 30 August 2013, the Fair Work Commission issued a protected action ballot order [PR541013] following an application by The Australian Workers’ Union (the AWU). On 3 September 2013 the AWU made an application under s448 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to revoke that order.

[2] Section 448 of the Act is as follows:

448 Revocation of protected action ballot order

(1) An applicant for a protected action ballot order may apply to the FWC, at any time before voting in the protected action ballot closes, to revoke the order.

(2) If an application to revoke a protected action ballot order is made, the FWC must revoke the order.

[3] The AWU has applied to revoke the protected action ballot order before voting in the protected action ballot closes on 20 September 2013. The Commission must revoke the order as prescribed by s.448 (2) of the Act.

[4] An order [PR541478] will be issued accordingly.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union applied to the Fair Work Commission to revoke an earlier order made in B2013/1176. The matter involved a dispute between the union and Viterra Limited, concerning the conditions of employment for certain workers. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the legal issues arising from this application.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the application to revoke the earlier order was valid and whether the circumstances had sufficiently changed to warrant such a revocation. The union argued that the conditions under which the original order was made had materially changed, necessitating a review of the decision. Viterra, on the other hand, contended that the conditions had not changed to the extent required to justify a revocation and that the original order should remain in place.

The Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the precedents and principles governing the revocation of orders. It found that while some changes had occurred, they did not amount to a significant alteration of the circumstances that would justify revoking the original order. The Commission also noted the importance of maintaining consistency and predictability in employment regulations. Based on these considerations, the Commission decided against revoking the earlier order.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application to revoke the order made in B2013/1176. The original order remains in effect, and the conditions of employment for the workers in question continue to be governed by that decision.

The Australian Workers' Union v Viterra Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established