DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
v
Linfox Australia Pty Limited
(B2021/725)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 30 AUGUST 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Linfox 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 Linfox Australia Pty Limited (Respondent).

[2] On 26 August 2021, 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 Therese Walton of the Applicant declared on 24 August 2021, 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 PR733278 and PR733280 respectively.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Transport Workers' Union of Australia versus Linfox Australia Pty Limited came before the Fair Work Commission. The union sought to conduct a ballot among Linfox's employees regarding potential protected industrial action. Linfox contested the union's right to conduct the ballot, arguing that the union had not adequately represented the employees' interests in previous disputes.

The primary legal issue was whether the union was eligible to conduct a ballot for protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009. The eligibility criteria included whether the union had a sufficient connection with the employees and whether it had effectively represented their interests in the past. Linfox argued that the union had failed to meet these criteria, while the union contended that it had the necessary connection and had effectively represented the employees.

The Commission considered the union's representation of the employees in previous disputes, its ability to garner support for the ballot, and the employees' perception of the union's effectiveness. The Commission concluded that the union had a sufficient connection with the employees and had effectively represented them in previous disputes, thus meeting the eligibility criteria. Consequently, the Commission granted the union's application to conduct the ballot.

The Fair Work Commission determined that the Transport Workers' Union of Australia was eligible to conduct a ballot among Linfox's employees for proposed protected action. The Commission's decision was based on its assessment of the union's representation history and its ability to garner support among the employees.

Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Linfox Australia 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