United Workers' Union v Givaudan Australia Pty Limited

[2022] FWC 1289

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v

Givaudan Australia Pty Limited

(B2022/469)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 25 MAY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Givaudan Australia Pty Limited

This is an application by the United Workers’ Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Givaudan Australia Pty Limited (Respondent).

On 23 May 2022, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose 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 statutory declaration of Pareen Minhas of the Applicant declared on 19 May 2022, 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 PR741959.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission considered an application by the United Workers' Union (UWU) under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) for an order allowing a protected action ballot for certain employees of Givaudan Australia Pty Limited (Givaudan). The application was made by the UWU, which sought to conduct a ballot for its members to take protected action in relation to certain terms and conditions of employment. Givaudan did not oppose the application, and the matter proceeded without a hearing.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the UWU had met the statutory requirements for conducting a protected action ballot under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine if the UWU had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with Givaudan and if there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement. The UWU submitted a statutory declaration from Pareen Minhas, who outlined the union's efforts in bargaining with Givaudan and its genuine attempts to reach an agreement. The Commission had to assess whether these efforts met the statutory criteria for proceeding with a ballot.

In determining the application, Vice President Catanzariti reviewed the material before the Commission, including the statutory declaration from Minhas. The Vice President found that the UWU had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with Givaudan and that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement. Consequently, the Vice President concluded that the UWU had satisfied the requirements under section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act to conduct a protected action ballot. As a result, the application was approved, and an order was issued separately in PR741959.

The Commission's decision authorised the UWU to proceed with a protected action ballot among its members at Givaudan, provided the union followed the legal requirements for such ballots under the Fair Work Act. This ruling allowed the UWU to pursue industrial action if necessary to achieve its objectives in negotiations with Givaudan.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established