DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v
Lion-Beer, Spirits & Wine Pty Ltd
(B2020/83)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 14 FEBRUARY 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Lion-Beer, Spirits & Wine Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by 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 Lion-Beer, Spirits & Wine Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 14 February 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 Leonidas Papanastasiou 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 PR716753.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The United Workers' Union sought an injunction to prevent Lion-Beer, Spirits and Wine Pty Ltd from conducting a ballot of its employees regarding proposed protected industrial action. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the ballot could proceed, considering the requirements and implications of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issues involved whether the proposed ballot complied with the statutory requirements for protected action. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the ballot notice provided by the company was sufficient and whether the proposed action met the criteria for protected action. This included evaluating the accuracy of the ballot notice and whether it adequately informed employees of the proposed action and its implications.

The court concluded that the ballot notice was not compliant with the statutory requirements as it failed to accurately describe the proposed industrial action. The notice did not sufficiently inform employees of the specific nature and scope of the proposed action. The court held that without a proper ballot notice, the employees could not be properly consulted about the proposed action. Consequently, the court granted the injunction, prohibiting the company from proceeding with the ballot.

The court ordered that the company was restrained from conducting the ballot as proposed, ensuring that employees were provided with a compliant notice before any further action could be taken. This decision underscores the importance of precise and comprehensive communication in the process of organising protected industrial action, highlighting the necessity for strict adherence to statutory requirements.

United Workers' Union v Lion-Beer, Spirits and Wine 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