Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd
[2012] FWA 10425
•11 DECEMBER 2012
[2012] FWA 10425 |
|
REASONS FOR DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
Transport Workers' Union of Australia
v
Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd
(B2012/2059)
and
Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU)
v
Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd
(B2012/2060)
COMMISSIONER CLOGHAN | PERTH, 11 DECEMBER 2012 |
Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd.
[1] On 29 November 2012, the Transport Workers’ Union of Australia (TWU) and the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) (collectively “the Unions”) made applications to Fair Work Australia (FWA) for protected action ballot orders pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the FW Act”).
[2] The employees to be balloted are those employed by Qube Logistics (WA) Pty Ltd (“the Employer”) who will be covered by a replacement enterprise agreement to the P & O Trans Australia Container Parks WA Enterprise Agreement 2011 (“the Agreement”) at the following sites:
- POTA Tydeman, Cnr Port Beach and Tydeman Roads, North Fremantle, Western Australia;
- POTA Central, Rous Head Road, Rous Head, Western Australia;
- MCD Sultan Way, Rous Head, Western Australia; and
- POTA Irene, Irene Street, Fremantle, Western Australia;
and who are represented by the Unions as bargaining representatives.
[3] The nominal expiry date of the Agreement was 30 June 2012.
[4] The applications were heard on 30 November 2012. At the conclusion of the hearing, I made a determination that the Unions had satisfied the provisions of the FW Act and Orders should issue (PR531944 in B2012/2059 and PR531948 in B2012/2060). These are the written reasons for issuing the Orders.
[5] At the hearing the TWU was represented by Mr A Dzieciol, TWU Senior Legal/Industrial Officer and evidence given by Mr T Dawson, Organiser, TWU. Mr Dzieciol also represented the AMWU and Mr Dawson also gave evidence on its behalf. The Employer did not attend the hearing.
[6] Mr Dzieciol requested, and I granted, for both matters to be heard and determined jointly.
[7] Mr Dawson gave written and oral evidence of his role in bargaining negotiations.
[8] On or around 14 May 2012, the Unions forwarded a log of claims to Mr Dan Coulton, National Industrial Relations and Business Development Manager for the Employer. The log of claims formed, for the Unions, the basis of bargaining for a replacement enterprise agreement. The log of claims was admitted into evidence.
[9] The Employer’s response to the log of claims was also tendered by Mr Dawson and admitted into evidence.
[10] There was an initial meeting to discuss the log of claims and approximately a further six (6) meetings in regard to a proposed replacement agreement. In addition, there have been telephone discussions and email exchanges concerning the replacement agreement.
[11] At the bargaining meetings, Mr Fry has attended on behalf of the AMWU.
[12] The Employer unsuccessfully put to employees a proposed replacement agreement.
[13] After five (5) months of negotiations, Mr Dawson gave evidence that the outstanding issues are wage increases and the term of the proposed replacement agreement.
[14] The Unions submitted that they are genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Employer for a replacement enterprise agreement.
[15] Mr Dzieciol advised the Tribunal that Mr Coulton was aware that the applications were being heard on 30 November 2012 and that the Employer had adopted the view that they would let the matter “run its course”.
CONCLUSION
[16] I am satisfied that the procedural requirements in sections 437, 438 and 448 of the FW Act have been met.
[17] Having considered the relevant provisions of the FW Act, the Unions’ submissions, Mr Dawson’s evidence and the Employer’s position as advised to the Tribunal by Mr Dzieciol, I determined that the applicant unions have been, and are, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Employer; on these grounds, I issued Orders PR531944 and PR531948 on 3 December 2012.
COMMISSIONER
Appearances:
A Dzieciol for the TWU and AMWU.
No appearance or representation by or on behalf of the Respondent.
Hearing details:
2012:
Perth,
30 November.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code C, PR532231>
0
0
0