DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v
George Weston Foods Limited T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria
(B2021/172)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 19 MARCH 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of George Weston Foods Limited T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria.

[1] 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 George Weston Foods Limited T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria (Respondent).

[2] On 18 March 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Pareen Minhas 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR727911.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved a dispute between the United Workers' Union and George Weston Foods Limited, trading as Tip Top Bakeries Victoria. The union sought to conduct a ballot of employees to determine their willingness to engage in protected industrial action. The company opposed the ballot on the grounds that it was not a genuine step towards resolving a workplace dispute and was instead an attempt to pressure the company into making concessions.

The primary legal issue was whether the proposed ballot constituted a genuine step towards resolving a genuine dispute. The company argued that the union had not demonstrated that the ballot was necessary to resolve a dispute, as there was no outstanding issue between the parties. The union contended that the ballot was a legitimate step to ascertain the employees' willingness to take action in support of their claims. The court was required to determine whether the union's proposed ballot was a genuine step towards resolving a genuine dispute.

The Fair Work Commission found that the union had not demonstrated that the proposed ballot was a genuine step towards resolving a genuine dispute. The Commission held that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to establish that the ballot was necessary to resolve a dispute, as there was no outstanding issue between the parties. The Commission also found that the union's proposed ballot was not a genuine step towards resolving a genuine dispute, as it was not directed towards resolving any particular dispute or issue. As a result, the Commission declined to order the company to facilitate the proposed ballot.

In summary, the Fair Work Commission found that the union had not demonstrated that the proposed ballot was a genuine step towards resolving a genuine dispute, and declined to order the company to facilitate the ballot. The Commission held that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to establish that the ballot was necessary to resolve a dispute, and that the ballot was not directed towards resolving any particular dispute or issue. This decision highlights the importance of demonstrating a genuine dispute and the need for a genuine step towards resolving that dispute in order to justify protected industrial action.

United Workers' Union v George Weston Foods Limited T/A Tip Top Bakeries Victoria

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established