United Workers' Union v Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd T/A Armaguard Summary

[2025] FWC 562

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union
v

Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd T/A Armaguard

(B2025/285)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 24 FEBRUARY 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd T/A Armaguard

This is an application by the United Workers’ Union (UWU or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd trading as Armaguard (Armaguard or Employer).

On 24 February 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer, in effect, 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 Jayden Haworth, Trade Union Official, setting out the steps taken by the UWU in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with Armaguard, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

The ballot is to be conducted by Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd (Fair Vote). Fair Vote has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.

For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 13 March 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

An Order has been separately issued in PR784706.

This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] This is, in effect, 10 working days from the anticipated commencement date of the ballot and was the period sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission considered an application by the United Workers' Union for a protected action ballot order concerning employees of Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, trading as Armaguard. The union sought the order under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, aiming to conduct a ballot for proposed protected action due to ongoing negotiations with the employer. The employer did not object to the application, leading the Commission to determine the matter on the submitted documents without a hearing. The Commission assessed the union's declaration, verifying its efforts to reach an agreement with the employer and confirming compliance with the Act's requirements.

The legal issues at hand included whether the union had genuinely attempted to negotiate with the employer, whether the notification period for the proposed agreement was appropriate, and if the union had fulfilled all prerequisites stipulated under section 443(1) of the Act. Additionally, the Commission needed to ascertain that the ballot agent, Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd, was approved and authorised to conduct the ballot as per section 468A of the Act. The Commission also had to set a closing date for the ballot to comply with section 443(3)(c).

The Deputy President of the Commission concluded that the union had indeed been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer, satisfying the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act. The Commission determined the closing date for the ballot as 13 March 2025, which aligned with the period sought by the union. Furthermore, the Commission confirmed that Fair Vote was an eligible and approved ballot agent. The Commission subsequently assigned the matter to another member to conduct a compulsory conciliation conference, aiming to facilitate meaningful negotiations between the parties.

The Commission issued an order to ensure the attendance of all bargaining representatives at the conference and may issue directions to prepare the parties for effective negotiations. The determination also specified the ballot period for the purposes of section 448A(2) of the Act.

United Workers' Union v Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd T/A Armaguard

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established