United Workers' Union v Couriers Please Pty Ltd Summary

[2022] FWC 3028

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union

Couriers Please Pty Ltd

(B2022/1712)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 15 NOVEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Couriers Please Pty Ltd.

This is an application by the United 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 Couriers Please Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 15 November 2022, 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 Ms Isabella Himmelreich 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 PR747939.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) considered an application by the United Workers' Union for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Couriers Please Pty Ltd. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and it was decided that the matter would be determined on the papers without holding a hearing, as the respondent did not object to the application. The primary objective of the application was to allow the union to conduct a ballot among its members for the purpose of determining whether to engage in protected action, which could include strikes or other forms of industrial action, in the context of ongoing negotiations with the employer.

The key legal issue before the Commission was whether the conditions for a protected action ballot were met. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employer and if there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement, as required by section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act. The union submitted a declaration by Ms Isabella Himmelreich, who attested to the steps taken in bargaining with the employer and the union's genuine efforts to reach an agreement.

After reviewing the material presented, including the declaration by Ms Himmelreich, Deputy President Clancy was satisfied that the union had indeed taken genuine steps to reach an agreement and that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement. Consequently, the Commission concluded that the requirements for a protected action ballot order were satisfied. The Commission issued an order permitting the union to proceed with the ballot as part of its efforts to negotiate with the employer.

In summary, the Fair Work Commission granted the United Workers' Union's application for a protected action ballot order. The decision was based on the union's genuine efforts to negotiate with Couriers Please Pty Ltd and the existence of a notification time for the proposed agreement. The Commission's determination allows the union to conduct a ballot among its members to decide on potential protected actions, such as strikes, in the context of ongoing negotiations with the employer.

United Workers' Union v Couriers Please Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established