United Workers' Union v Endeavour Group Limited Summary

[2022] FWC 2410

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v

Endeavour Group Limited

(B2022/1355)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 12 SEPTEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Endeavour Group Limited.

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 Endeavour Group Limited (Respondent).

On 9 September 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 Anne Purdy 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 PR745701.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission, under the leadership of Deputy President Clancy, dealt with a case brought by the United Workers’ Union against Endeavour Group Limited. The Union sought a protected action ballot order for certain employees of the Respondent, as stipulated under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was lodged on 9 September 2022 and the Respondent did not object to the application, allowing the matter to be determined on the submitted documents without a formal hearing. The Union's declaration, provided by Ms Anne Purdy, outlined the bargaining steps taken and the Union's genuine efforts to reach an agreement with the Respondent.

The key legal issues before the Court were whether a notification time for the proposed agreement existed and if the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act were satisfied. The Court needed to determine if the Union had fulfilled the prerequisites for a protected action ballot as per the Fair Work Act 2009. The decision hinged on whether the Union's actions and the Respondent's response aligned with the legislative requirements.

Upon reviewing the provided documents and declarations, Deputy President Clancy found that the Union had indeed taken appropriate steps in its negotiations with the Respondent. The Court was satisfied that there was a notification time for the proposed agreement and that the conditions of section 443(1) of the Act were met. Consequently, the Deputy President decided to grant the Union's application for a protected action ballot order. This decision was documented in a separate order issued under the reference PR745701.

In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission ruled in favour of the United Workers’ Union, granting their application for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of Endeavour Group Limited. This decision was based on the evidence that the Union had engaged in good faith negotiations with the Respondent and met the necessary legal criteria under the Fair Work Act 2009.

United Workers' Union v Endeavour Group Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established