DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Transport Workers’ Union
v
SUEZ Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Recycling & Recovery
(B2021/997)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 13 OCTOBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of SUEZ Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Recycling & Recovery.

[1] 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 SUEZ Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Recycling & Recovery (Respondent).

[2] On 13 October 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Mr Simon Russell 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR734858.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Fair Work Commission involved the Transport Workers' Union and SUEZ Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Recycling & Recovery. The dispute centred on the union's proposed ballot of employees for protected action, which the company contested. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the validity and scope of the union's ballot. The legal issues revolved around whether the union's proposed industrial action was protected and whether the ballot process adhered to the necessary legal requirements. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the ballot notice provided sufficient details and whether the action was genuinely related to workplace issues.

The Fair Work Commission found that the union's ballot notice did not contain all the required particulars, particularly the specific workplace issue giving rise to the proposed action. The commission held that the absence of these details rendered the ballot invalid. Furthermore, the court determined that the union had not demonstrated that the proposed action was genuinely related to workplace issues. Consequently, the union's proposed protected action ballot was deemed unlawful. The commission emphasised the importance of compliance with statutory requirements for ballot notices and the necessity of clearly identifying the workplace issues at hand.

The outcome of the decision was that the union's proposed ballot was invalid due to insufficient information and lack of a genuine connection to workplace issues. The Fair Work Commission's ruling underscores the importance of adhering to statutory requirements for ballot notices in protected industrial action. The commission's decision provided clarity on the specific elements required in a ballot notice and reinforced the need for unions to ensure their proposed actions are genuinely related to workplace matters.

Transport Workers' Union v SUEZ Recycling & Recovery Pty Ltd T/A SUEZ Recycling & Recovery

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established