| [2025] FWC 1383 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
United Workers' Union
v
Australian Wool Testing Authority Ltd
(B2025/794)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON | ADELAIDE, 19 MAY 2025 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Australian Wool Testing Authority Ltd
This is an application by the United Workers’ Union (UWU or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Australian Wool Testing Authority Ltd (Wool Testing Authority or Employer).
On 19 May 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer, in effect, 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 Dave Carter, Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the UWU in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Wool Testing Authority, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.
The ballot is to be conducted by Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd (Fair Vote). Fair Vote has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.
For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 30 May 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.
An Order has been separately issued in PR787450.
This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
[1] This is, in effect, 9 working days from the making of the Order and was the specific date sought in the application.
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR787451>
- AGLC
- United Workers' Union v Australian Wool Testing Authority Ltd [2025] FWC 1383
- Case
- [2025] FWC 1383
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Commission involved confirming whether the UWU met all statutory requirements under the Fair Work Act to conduct the ballot. This included verifying that the UWU had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employer and that all procedural requirements for a protected action ballot were fulfilled. Additionally, the court had to determine the closing date for the voting process in accordance with the legislative provisions. The Commission also needed to ensure that the ballot agent, Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd, was appropriately authorised under the Act to conduct the ballot.
In its decision, the Commission found that the UWU had adhered to all statutory requirements for initiating a protected action ballot. The Deputy President was satisfied with the evidence presented by the UWU, including the declaration of Dave Carter, Organiser, which detailed the union's efforts in bargaining with the employer. The Commission established that the ballot must close on 30 May 2025, aligning with the application's request for a nine-working-day voting period. Additionally, the Commission authorised Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd to conduct the ballot, confirming their eligibility as a ballot agent under the Fair Work Act.
The final orders included granting the UWU's application for a protected action ballot order and setting the closing date for the voting process as 30 May 2025. The Commission also issued a separate order assigning the matter to another member for a compulsory conciliation conference, aimed at facilitating meaningful negotiations between the parties. This decision was integral in formalising the process for the employees to vote on potential protected industrial action.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.