Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, Prosegur Australia Pty Limited and Point 2 Point Secure Pty Ltd

Case [2025] FWC 2892


[2025] FWC 2892

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Transport Workers' Union of Australia
v
Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, Prosegur Australia Pty Limited and Point 2 Point Secure Pty Ltd

(B2025/1518)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT WRIGHT

SYDNEY, 29 SEPTEMBER 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, Prosegur Australia Pty Limited and Point 2 Point Secure Pty Ltd – non-AEC ballot agent electronic voting

  1. This is an application by the Transport Workers' Union of Australia (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 Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd (Linfox), Prosegur Australia Pty Limited (Prosegur) and Point 2 Point Secure Pty Ltd (Point 2 Point), collectively the Employers.

  1. Linfox is the parent company of the employers referenced above. On 29 September 2025, the Commission was advised by Linfox that the Employers did not object to the Application. 

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

  1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of James Wilkinson, TWU Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the TWU in bargaining with the Employers and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with them, 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. 

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

  1. 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 October 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act. 

  1. I am satisfied that there are relevant exceptional circumstances required by s.443(5), justifying an extended minimum period of written notice for the purposes of s.414(2)(b) of the Act when taking industrial action set out in the Order made by the Commission. The extended notice period of five (5) working days applies to the actions listed in questions 2 to 5 (only in relation to stoppages on the performance of work for periods of over four hours) in Clause 5 of the Order.

  1. An Order has been separately issued in PR792197. 

  1. 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 in 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, 10 working days from the making of the Order and was the period sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR792198>

Details
AGLC
Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, Prosegur Australia Pty Limited and Point 2 Point Secure Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 2892
Case
[2025] FWC 2892
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Transport Workers' Union of Australia (TWU) applied to the Fair Work Commission under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, Prosegur Australia Pty Limited, and Point 2 Point Secure Pty Ltd. The application was made to conduct a ballot to potentially authorise protected industrial action. Linfox, the parent company of the employers, did not object to the application, allowing the Commission to decide the matter on the papers without a hearing. The TWU claimed it had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement with the employers, fulfilling the notification period and all requirements under section 443(1) of the Act. The ballot was to be conducted by Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd, an approved ballot agent.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the TWU had met all statutory requirements to conduct a ballot for protected industrial action. This involved verifying that the TWU had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employers and that the requirements for the notice period and ballot agent were met. The Commission also needed to determine whether exceptional circumstances justified an extended notice period for certain actions outlined in the ballot. Additionally, the Commission had to ensure compliance with the Act's provisions regarding the timing and conduct of the ballot.

The Deputy President, Wright, concluded that the TWU had satisfied all the statutory requirements for a ballot under the Fair Work Act. The TWU had demonstrated its genuine efforts to reach an agreement with the employers. Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd was duly approved as a ballot agent, and the Commission set the voting closure date as 14 October 2025. The Deputy President found that there were exceptional circumstances justifying an extended notice period of five working days for specific actions listed in the ballot. Consequently, the Commission issued an Order to conduct the ballot and mandated a compulsory conciliation conference to facilitate further negotiations between the parties. Another member of the Commission was assigned to oversee the conciliation conference and issue related orders and directions.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.