DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
v
Jetstar Services Pty Limited
(B2019/1292)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 13 NOVEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Jetstar Services 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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Jetstar Services Pty Limited (Respondent).

[2] On 11 November 2019, 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 Dissio Markos of the Applicant 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 and Directions have been separately issued in PR714236 and PR714282 respectively.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the recent decision of Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Jetstar Services Pty Limited, the Fair Work Commission addressed a dispute between the union and the airline regarding a proposed industrial action ballot. The union sought to conduct a ballot to determine if employees would support protected industrial action. Jetstar opposed the ballot, arguing that it would breach existing enterprise agreements and cause significant operational disruption. The case was heard by the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over workplace relations disputes in Australia.

The central legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed ballot complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, and whether it would cause substantial operational disruption to Jetstar's business. The union contended that the ballot was a lawful means to ascertain employee support for potential action, while Jetstar argued that the ballot would lead to operational chaos and was therefore unlawful. The Commission needed to balance the union's right to organise with Jetstar's right to manage its business operations effectively.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission examined the union's compliance with the requirements for protected action and the potential impact of the ballot on Jetstar's operations. The Commission determined that the union had not adequately demonstrated that the ballot would be conducted in a manner that minimised disruption to Jetstar's operations. The Commission found that the potential for significant operational disruption outweighed the union's right to organise the ballot, leading to the conclusion that the proposed ballot should not proceed. Consequently, the Commission ruled against the union, prohibiting the ballot from taking place.

The Fair Work Commission's final order was that the proposed ballot of Jetstar employees by the Transport Workers' Union of Australia be prohibited. The Commission emphasised the importance of protecting business operations from unnecessary disruption while recognising the union's right to organise. This decision underscores the need for industrial action to be conducted in a manner that balances the rights of employees with the operational needs of employers.

Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Jetstar Services Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established