Transport Workers' Union of Australia v DHL Express (Australia) Pty Ltd

[2025] FWC 2161

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
v

DHL Express (Australia) Pty Ltd

(B2025/1178)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 24 JULY 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of DHL Express (Australia) Pty Ltd

This is an application by the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia acting through its NSW/QLD (Interim Governance) Branch (TWU or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of DHL Express (Australia) Pty Ltd (DHL Express or Employer).

On 24 July 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer did not object to 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 declaration of Christopher Smith, Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the TWU in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with DHL Express, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

The ballot is to be conducted by Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd (CiVS). CiVS has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.

For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 14 August 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

An Order has been separately issued in PR789990.

This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives for the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] This is, in effect, 14 working days from the making of the Order and was the period sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Transport Workers' Union of Australia, acting through its NSW/QLD (Interim Governance) Branch, applied to the Fair Work Commission for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of DHL Express (Australia) Pty Ltd. This application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The employer did not object to the application, allowing the Commission to proceed without a hearing. The applicant aimed to conduct a ballot to potentially take protected action related to negotiations for a proposed enterprise agreement.

The legal issues before the Deputy President involved determining whether the applicant met the requirements of section 443 of the Fair Work Act to hold a protected action ballot. This included verifying the notification period and the steps taken by the union in bargaining with the employer. The Deputy President considered the declaration from the union's organiser, Christopher Smith, detailing the bargaining process and the union's efforts to reach an agreement.

Upon reviewing the material presented, the Deputy President concluded that all requirements under section 443(1) of the Act were satisfied, including the notification period for the proposed agreement. The Commission appointed Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd (CiVS) to conduct the ballot, having approved them as an eligible ballot agent under section 468A of the Act. The Deputy President set 14 August 2025 as the closing date for voting, effectively establishing a 14 working-day period from the issuance of the order. Additionally, the Commission assigned another member to conduct a compulsory conciliation conference under section 448A of the Act, issuing an order to ensure the attendance of bargaining representatives for meaningful negotiations.

The Commission issued an order for the ballot to proceed and scheduled the compulsory conciliation conference to ensure that the parties were prepared for meaningful negotiations. This decision allows the union to proceed with the ballot as requested and facilitates further discussions between the union and the employer to potentially reach an agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established