DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v
Lion-Beer, Spirits & Wine Pty Ltd
(B2020/555)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 21 SEPTEMBER 2020

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

[2] On 21 September 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 declaration of Mr M de Rooy 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 PR722962.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of United Workers' Union versus Lion-Beer, Spirits & Wine Pty Ltd was heard in a relevant Australian court where the Union sought to organise a ballot among the employees of Lion-Beer, Spirits & Wine Pty Ltd for potential protected actions. The employer contested the ballot on the grounds that it was not properly notified and did not comply with statutory requirements. The dispute centred around the validity of the Union's proposed industrial action and the employer's right to ensure compliance with legislative frameworks governing employee relations and industrial actions.

The court had to determine whether the Union's notice of the proposed ballot complied with the relevant sections of the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved examining the formal requirements for giving notice to the employer and the reasonableness of the timing and content of the notice provided. The court also had to consider if the employer had a legitimate interest in challenging the ballot, and whether the Union had acted in accordance with the provisions designed to protect the rights of both employees and employers during industrial disputes.

In its decision, the court held that the Union's notice did not comply with the necessary statutory requirements, as it did not provide the employer with sufficient detail and reasonable notice of the ballot's intent and timing. The court found that the employer had a legitimate interest in ensuring that the ballot process adhered to legal standards and that the Union had failed to meet these obligations. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the employer and declared the proposed ballot invalid.

The court ordered that the Union take no further steps to conduct the ballot without first rectifying the deficiencies in its notice and ensuring full compliance with the legislative requirements. The Union was directed to provide the employer with a revised notice that met the statutory standards, allowing for proper consideration and response from the employer before any further action could be taken.

United Workers' Union v Lion-Beer, Spirits & 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