DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union
v
Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd
(B2020/71)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 10 FEBRUARY 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd.

[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 Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 10 January 2020, 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 statutory declaration of Mr A Auld 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 PR716552.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of United Workers' Union versus Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The union, representing employees of Inghams, sought to conduct a ballot among its members to authorize protected industrial action. Inghams opposed the ballot on the grounds that it was not necessary and not conducted in accordance with the relevant legislation.

The legal issues at the heart of this dispute centred around whether the union's request to conduct the ballot was justified under the Fair Work Act 2009 and whether the proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements outlined within the Act. Specifically, the court had to determine if the union provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the necessity of the ballot and whether the ballot notice was appropriate.

The Commission found that the union had adequately demonstrated the necessity for the ballot by presenting evidence of unresolved workplace issues and the failure of negotiations between the union and Inghams. The Commission also concluded that the ballot notice complied with the requirements of the Act, as it contained all the necessary information for members to make an informed decision. Therefore, the Commission approved the union's application for the ballot.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the union may proceed with the proposed ballot of its members, allowing the employees to vote on whether to authorize protected industrial action.

United Workers' Union v Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established