United Voice v Ensign Services (Aust) Pty Ltd
[2011] FWA 7122
•17 OCTOBER 2011
[2011] FWA 7122 |
|
REASONS FOR DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
United Voice
v
Ensign Services (Aust) Pty Ltd
(B2011/3738)
COMMISSIONER JONES | MELBOURNE, 17 OCTOBER 2011 |
Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Ensign Services (Aust) Pty Ltd.
[1] On 14 October 2011, the United Voice (“the Applicant”) made application to Fair Work Australia (FWA) for Protected Action Ballot Order pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”).
[2] The employees to be balloted are employed by Ensign Services (Aust) Pty Ltd (“the Employer”) at the Employer’s premises known as Ensign Northcote.
[3] The employees to be balloted have their conditions of employment regulated, in part, by the Ensign and LHMU Northcote Production Collective Agreement 2008, which has a nominal expiry date of 1 June 2011.
[4] On 17 October 2011, directions were issued to the parties requiring the Employer to advise by 5:00pm Monday 17 October 2011 whether it opposed the orders sought and whether it wished to be heard by Fair Work Australia. The Applicant was directed to file an outline of submissions and any witness statements they intended to rely on. The Respondent advised my Associate that they did not object to the Orders proposed and did not wish to be heard by Fair Work Australia.
[5] Section 443(1) of the Act states:
443 When FWA must make a protected action ballot order
(1) FWA 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) FWA 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.
[6] The Applicant has provided an outline of Submissions and witness statement addressing those matters in s.443(1) of the Act.
[7] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.
[8] I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, the order must be made. The order (PR515809) is based on the draft order provided by the Applicant and is issued in conjunction with this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR515810>
0
0
0