Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Australian Red Cross Blood Service

[2013] FWC 7419

[2013] FWC 7419

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Transport Workers' Union of Australia
v
Australian Red Cross Blood Service
(B2013/1259)

COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE SYDNEY, 26 SEPTEMBER 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Australian Red Cross Blood Service.

[1] On 23 September 2013, the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (TWU), made an application for a protected action ballot order. The application was made pursuant to section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). The application was made in respect of members of the TWU who are employees of Australian Red Cross Blood Service, (the employer) whose employment is to be regulated by the proposed agreement to replace the Australian Red Cross Blood Service New South Wales Enterprise Agreement 2010 [AE883667].

[2] The application seeks a ballot of employees of the employer who are members of the TWU and who would be covered by a proposed enterprise agreement. The application included a Statement of Robert Pirc dated 24 February 2013 (the Statement). In summary, the Statement provided information about events involving attempts made by the TWU to reach agreement with the employer on the terms of a proposed enterprise agreement.

[3] The application was listed for Hearing before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) on 26 September 2013, at which time Mr C. O’Callaghan appeared for the TWU and there was no appearance by or on behalf of the employer. The employer had earlier advised that it did not oppose the application.

[4] In view of the materials filed and the submissions made by Mr O’Callaghan during the Hearing, FWC provided an extemporary determination of the application and this Decision is issued as confirmation of that determination.

[5] The determination of this matter is primarily governed by the provisions of section 443 of the Act. Section 443 is in the following terms:

“443 When the FWC must make a protected action ballot order

(1) The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:

(a) an application has been made under section 437; and

(b) the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.

(2) The FWC must not make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement except in the circumstances referred to in subsection (1).

(3) A protected action ballot order must specify the following:

(a) the name of each applicant for the order;

(b) the group or groups of employees who are to be balloted;

(c) the date by which voting in the protected action ballot closes;

(d) the question or questions to be put to the employees who are to be balloted, including the nature of the proposed industrial action.

(4) If the FWC decides that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission is to be the protected action ballot agent for the protected action ballot, the protected action ballot order must also specify:

(a) the person that the FWC decides, under subsection 444(1), is to be the protected action ballot agent; and

(b) the person (if any) that the FWC decides, under subsection 444(3), is to be the independent advisor for the ballot.

(5) If the FWC is satisfied, in relation to the proposed industrial action that is the subject of the protected action ballot, that there are exceptional circumstances justifying the period of written notice referred to in paragraph 414(2)(a) being longer than 3 working days, the protected action ballot order may specify a longer period of up to 7 working days.

Note: Under subsection 414(1), before a person engages in employee claim action for a proposed enterprise agreement, a bargaining representative of an employee who will be covered by the agreement must give written notice of the action to the employer of the employee.”

[6] In this instance I am satisfied that the application has been made in accordance with section 437 of the Act. In particular, I am satisfied that the applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted. In addition, I am satisfied that the requirements of sections 438 and 440 of the Act have also been met.

[7] Therefore, pursuant to subsection 443(1) of the Act, the FWC must make a protected action ballot order sought by the TWU. Accordingly an Order [PR542466] is issued separately.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

Mr C. O’Callaghan appeared on behalf of the TWU.

Hearing details:

Sydney, 26 September 2013.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR542463>