United Workers' Union v Linfox Australia Pty Ltd

[2022] FWC 2198

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v

Linfox Australia Pty Ltd

(B2022/1236)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 18 AUGUST 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Linfox Australia Pty Ltd

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 Linfox Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 17 August 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 Ian Madgwick of the Applicant declared on 16 August 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 PR744936.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission was presented with an application by the United Workers' Union, seeking an order for a protected action ballot concerning certain employees of Linfox Australia Pty Ltd. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which pertains to protected action ballots. The Commission was notified on 17 August 2022 that Linfox Australia Pty Ltd did not oppose the application. Given the lack of opposition and the evidence presented, the matter was determined by the Commission without a hearing. The decision was based on a statutory declaration by Ian Madgwick of the United Workers' Union, which outlined the union's efforts to negotiate with Linfox Australia Pty Ltd and confirmed that the union had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the conditions for a protected action ballot were met under the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to determine if there was a notification period for the proposed agreement and if the statutory requirements outlined in section 443(1) of the Act had been satisfied. The Commission assessed the material submitted, including the declaration by Ian Madgwick, to ascertain these points. The Commission concluded that the union had indeed met the notification requirements and was acting in good faith in its negotiations with Linfox Australia Pty Ltd. Consequently, the Commission found that the prerequisites for a protected action ballot were fulfilled.

Upon determining that the statutory requirements had been satisfied and that the union had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement, the Vice President of the Fair Work Commission, Catanzariti, issued an order for a protected action ballot. The order was made in relation to the employees of Linfox Australia Pty Ltd and was issued on 18 August 2022. The Commission noted that this decision was separate from another matter, identified as PR744936, which was also addressed in the Commission's order. This decision underscores the Commission's role in facilitating fair work practices and ensuring that unions and employers can proceed with necessary industrial actions in accordance with the law.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established