United Workers' Union v Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd T/A Fonterra Australia Summary

[2022] FWC 2325

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v

Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd T/A Fonterra Australia

(B2022/1309)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 1 SEPTEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd Trading As Fonterra Australia

This is an application 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 Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd trading as Fonterra Australia (Respondent).

On 1 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 Mr David Harris 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 PR745399.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The United Workers' Union (UWU) applied to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for an order permitting a protected action ballot of certain employees of Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Fonterra Australia. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) and the FWC determined the matter on the papers, as the respondent did not object to the application. The UWU sought to conduct a ballot of its members who are employees of Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd, to determine if they would support protected action in relation to certain matters of mutual interest.

The key legal issue before the FWC was whether the UWU had met the requirements of section 443(1) of the FW Act, which sets out the conditions for a protected action ballot. Specifically, the FWC had to determine if there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and if the UWU had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd. The UWU submitted a declaration by Mr David Harris, setting out the steps taken by the union in bargaining with Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd and that it had been, and was, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the employer.

The FWC was satisfied, based on the material before it, that the UWU had met the requirements of section 443(1) of the FW Act. The Deputy President was satisfied that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that the UWU had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd. The FWC issued an order in PR745399, permitting the UWU to conduct the protected action ballot.

United Workers' Union v Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd T/A Fonterra Australia

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established