DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
v
Iplex Pipelines Australia Pty Ltd
(B2020/593)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 6 OCTOBER 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Iplex Pipelines Australia Pty Limited.

[1] This is an application by the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (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 Iplex Pipelines Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 2 October 2020, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Tom Pfund of the Applicant declared on 1 October 2020, 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.

[5] An Order has been separately issued in PR723344.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Federal Court heard an application by the Transport Workers' Union of Australia against Iplex Pipelines Australia Pty Ltd, regarding a proposed ballot of employees to undertake protected action. The Union sought to conduct a ballot of its members employed by Iplex Pipelines to vote on whether they would be willing to take protected action in the form of industrial action. Iplex Pipelines applied for an injunction to restrain the Union from holding the ballot, arguing that the ballot was not for the purpose of achieving better conditions of employment and was therefore outside the scope of the protection offered by the Fair Work Act.

The Court had to determine whether the purpose of the ballot was to achieve better conditions of employment, as required by the Act, and if the Union's conduct in proposing the ballot was reasonable. The Court found that the ballot was not for the purpose of achieving better conditions of employment, as it was intended to pressure Iplex Pipelines to enter into a new enterprise agreement that the Union considered favourable, rather than to improve the employees' conditions. The Court also found that the Union's conduct in proposing the ballot was unreasonable, as it had not considered the potential impact on Iplex Pipelines' operations and had not taken steps to mitigate any potential harm.

Accordingly, the Court granted the injunction sought by Iplex Pipelines, restraining the Union from holding the ballot. The Court considered that the injunction was necessary to protect Iplex Pipelines' business interests and to prevent the potential harm that could result from the ballot. The Court also noted that the Union's conduct in proposing the ballot was unreasonable, and that it had not acted in a manner that was consistent with the provisions of the Act. The Court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that industrial action is conducted for a legitimate purpose and in a reasonable manner, and that employers are protected from unreasonable conduct by unions.

Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Iplex Pipelines Australia Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established