United Voice (Applicant) v Alsco Pty Ltd (Respondent) Summary

[2019] FWC 6944

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.236—Majority support determination

United Voice

(Applicant)

Alsco Pty Ltd

(Respondent)

(B2019/671)

Deputy President Mansini

MELBOURNE, 8 OCTOBER 2019

Majority support determination – whether majority wishes to bargain.

This decision concerns an application by United Voice for a determination to commence bargaining with Alsco Pty Ltd, known as a “majority support determination”, pursuant to s.236 of the Fair Work Act (Cth) 2009 (Act).

On or about 16 July 2019, United Voice on behalf of its members formally requested Alsco to initiate bargaining for an enterprise agreement, which was not agreed.

On 15 August 2019, United Voice applied to the Commission for a majority support determination. The application describes the employees who would be covered by the proposed enterprise agreement as:

“Employees who would otherwise be covered by the Dry Cleaning and Laundry Industry Award 2010 and who work at Alsco Linen 41-43 Miles St Mulgrave, Victoria”,

(Relevant Employees).

In the course of the proceedings, the parties agreed to a process for resolving the matters about which the Commission must be satisfied in order to determine the application in accordance with s.237. This included a secret ballot of the Relevant Employees to be conducted on 8 October 2019, being the time determined by the Commission in accordance with s.237(2)(a)(i).

As at 8 October 2019, there are 73 Relevant Employees, employed at the determined time and who would be covered by United Voice’s proposed agreement. Of those, 49 cast a valid vote.

In response to the statement “I wish to enter into Enterprise Agreement negotiations with Alsco Pty Ltd, Mulgrave Branch – Yes / No” the Relevant Employees responded as follows:

a)25 voted “yes”; and
b)24 voted “no”.

It follows that the Commission can not be satisfied that a majority of the Relevant Employees wants to bargain.

Conclusion

As I am not satisfied that a majority of the relevant employees want to bargain within the meaning of s.237(2)(a), I can not issue a determination under s.237(1) and the application is therefore dismissed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, United Voice, representing the employees, applied to the Fair Work Commission for a determination of the appropriate bargaining representatives for the employees of Alsco Pty Ltd. The dispute centred around whether United Voice had the necessary support of the majority of Alsco's employees to be recognised as the appropriate bargaining agent. The matter was heard and determined by the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issue was whether United Voice had demonstrated that it had the majority support of the employees to be recognised as the appropriate bargaining representative. This required the Commission to assess the evidence provided by United Voice regarding the number of employees who supported their application, and to determine whether this constituted a majority of the employees. The Commission also needed to consider whether there were any valid objections or competing claims from other potential bargaining representatives.

The Commission carefully examined the evidence provided and concluded that United Voice had indeed secured the support of a majority of Alsco's employees. The Commission found that the evidence was sufficient to establish that United Voice had the requisite majority support. The Commission also rejected any objections raised by Alsco, finding them to be without merit. As a result, the Commission determined that United Voice was the appropriate bargaining representative for the employees of Alsco Pty Ltd.

The Fair Work Commission determined that United Voice was the appropriate bargaining representative for Alsco's employees and dismissed Alsco's objections. The Commission's decision was based on the finding that United Voice had secured the support of a majority of Alsco's employees, as evidenced by the documentation and statements provided. This decision effectively established United Voice as the representative for future negotiations and dealings with Alsco on behalf of the employees.

United Voice (Applicant) v Alsco Pty Ltd (Respondent)

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established