Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Zip Airport Services Pty Ltd

[2023] FWC 631

[2023] FWC 631

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Transport Workers’ Union of Australia
v

Zip Airport Services Pty Ltd

(B2023/246)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY MELBOURNE, 17 MARCH 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Zip Airport Services Pty Ltd

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 (PABO).

1. In its application, the Applicant sought a PABO in relation to employees of Viva Energy Australia Pty Ltd and specified the employees to be balloted as being employees of Viva Energy Australia Pty Ltd who are members of the Applicant and for who the Applicant is their bargaining agent. It was subsequently confirmed that the employer of these employees and the correct respondent to the application is in fact Zip Airport Services Pty Ltd (Respondent). I have determined that I should amend the application so as to record “Zip Airport Services Pty Ltd” as the respondent to the application, and I consider my doing so comes within the circumstances in which it has been held this is possible pursuant to s.586 of the Act.[1] There was no objection to this course of action.

1. The Respondent has not objected to the application however it has contended that there are exceptional circumstances justifying a longer notice period.

1. I am not 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) of the Act being longer than 3 working days. I will publish my reasons for this decision in due course.

1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Dean Sloan 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.

1. An order has been separately issued in PR760330.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:
Mr B Baarini for the Applicant
Ms N Gaspar for the Respondent

Hearing details:
2023
Melbourne
17 March 2023

[1] Djula v Centurion Transport Co. Pty Ltd [2015] FWCFB 2371 at [28].

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR760329>