Transport Workers' Union v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson Summary

[2021] FWC 6137

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Transport Workers’ Union
v

Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson
(B2021/985)

Deputy President Clancy

MELBOURNE, 15 OCTOBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson.

This is an application by the Transport Workers’ Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson (Respondent).

On 15 October 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Mr Wayne Commerford 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.

An order has been separately issued in PR734944.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Transport Workers' Union (Applicant) made an application under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 to the Fair Work Commission (Commission) for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson (Respondent). The application was made due to a dispute in bargaining between the Applicant and the Respondent. On 15 October 2021, the Commission received notice that the Respondent did not object to the application. Consequently, the Deputy President decided to determine the matter based on the submitted documentation without holding a hearing.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the notification time for a proposed agreement existed and if the requirements outlined in section 443(1) of the Act had been fulfilled. The Applicant argued that it had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement with the Respondent and had taken necessary steps in bargaining, as evidenced by a declaration from Mr Wayne Commerford of the Applicant.

The Deputy President found that the Applicant had indeed met the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act. The Commission was satisfied that a notification time for the proposed agreement existed and that the conditions for a protected action ballot had been met. As a result, the Deputy President issued an order in the matter, which was separately documented as PR734944.

The Fair Work Commission granted the Transport Workers' Union's application for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson. The decision was made on the basis of the provided documentation and the absence of objection from the Respondent. An order was issued in PR734944, authorising the protected action ballot for the employees in question.

Transport Workers' Union v Hanson Construction Materials Pty Ltd T/A Hanson

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established