Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Trident Services Security Pty Ltd

[2025] FWC 1327

[2025] FWC 1327

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Transport Workers' Union of Australia
v

Trident Services Security Pty Ltd

(B2025/772)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON ADELAIDE, 13 MAY 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Trident Services Security Pty Ltd

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 Trident Services Security Pty Ltd (Trident or Employer).

1. On 9 May 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer objected to the Application on the grounds that they are continuing to bargain in good faith, and are awaiting a response to discussions that they have sought with their clients that may facilitate the making of an agreement.

1. In the circumstances, I have conducted a hearing today to determine the matter. During the course of the hearing, Trident clarified that its objection was, in effect, that the making of a protected action ballot order (PABO) was unnecessary as the bargaining was proceeding in good faith and that progress was and could still be made without that order being made. Constructively, Trident confirmed that the TWU had been and is genuinely trying to reach an agreement. The TWU also confirmed that the same finding could be made in relation to Trident and the genuine negotiations were being conducted.

1. At the conclusion of the hearing, I advised the parties that the application met all of the statutory requirements for the PABO to be made and that I would issue the order as sought. My reasons for doing so are briefly set out below.

1. Section 437 of the Act provides as follows:

“437 Application for a protected action ballot order

Who may apply for a protected action ballot order

(1)A bargaining representative of an employee who will be covered by a proposed enterprise agreement, or 2 or more such bargaining representatives (acting jointly), may apply to the FWC for an order (a protected action ballot order) requiring a protected action ballot to be conducted to determine whether employees wish to engage in particular protected industrial action for the agreement.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the proposed enterprise agreement is:

(a)a greenfields agreement; or

(b)a cooperative workplace agreement.

(2A) Subsection (1) does not apply unless there has been a notification time in relation to the proposed enterprise agreement.

Note: For notification time, see subsection 173(2). Protected industrial action cannot be taken until after bargaining has commenced (including where the scope of the proposed enterprise agreement is the only matter in dispute).

Matters to be specified in application

(3) The application must specify:

(a)the group or groups of employees who are to be balloted; and

(b)the question or questions to be put to the employees who are to be balloted, including the nature of the proposed industrial action; and

(c)the name of the person or entity that the applicant wishes to be the protected action ballot agent for the protected action ballot.

Note:The protected action ballot agent for the ballot must be an eligible protected action ballot agent unless there are exceptional circumstances: see section 444.

(5) A group of employees specified under paragraph (3)(a) is taken to include only employees who:

(a)will be covered by the proposed enterprise agreement; and

(b)either:

(i)are represented by a bargaining representative who is an applicant for the protected action ballot order; or

(ii)are bargaining representatives for themselves but are members of an employee organisation that is an applicant for the protected action ballot order.

Documents to accompany the application

(6) The application must be accompanied by any documents and other information prescribed by the regulations.”

1. Section 443 of the Act provides:

“443 When the FWC must make a protected action ballot order

(1)The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:

(a)an application has been made under section 437; and

(b) the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.

(2)The FWC must not make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement except in the circumstances referred to in subsection (1).

(3)A protected action ballot order must specify the following:

(a)the name of each applicant for the order;

(b)the group or groups of employees who are to be balloted;

(c)the date by which voting in the protected action ballot closes;

(d)the question or questions to be put to the employees who are to be balloted, including the nature of the proposed industrial action;

(e)the person or entity that the FWC decides, under subsection 444(1A), is to be the protected action ballot agent for the protected action ballot;

(f)the person (if any) that the FWC decides, under subsection 444(3), is to be the independent advisor for the ballot.

(3A)For the purposes of paragraph (3)(c), the FWC must specify a date that will enable the protected action ballot to be conducted as expeditiously as practicable.

(5)If the FWC is satisfied, in relation to the proposed industrial action that is the subject of the protected action ballot, that there are exceptional circumstances justifying the period of written notice referred to in paragraph 414(2)(a) being longer than 3 working days or 120 hours (whichever is applicable), the protected action ballot order may specify a longer period of up to 7 working days.

Note: Under subsection 414(1), before a person engages in employee claim action for a proposed enterprise agreement, a bargaining representative of an employee who will be covered by the agreement must give written notice of the action to the employer of the employee.”

1. I observe for completeness that there are other statutory requirements for a PABO to be issued that are not in issue in this matter. Further, all of the matters raised in the provisions above were also now not in dispute.

1. I would be open to the suggestion that progress in bargaining for a new enterprise agreement in this matter remains possible without recourse to protected industrial action. However, this is not the test for a PABO to be issued and protected industrial action as part of bargaining, provided that the various statutory requirements have been met, is part of the scheme of the Act. I also emphasise that notwithstanding the making of a PABO, bargaining and the associated good faith obligations continue.

1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of William Cheffirs, Industrial Officer, setting out the steps taken by the TWU in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Trident, 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 Vero Engagement and Voting Solutions Pty Ltd (Vero). Vero 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 27 May 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

1. An Order has been separately issued in PR787263.

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 confirmed during the hearing of this matter.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR787264>