United Workers' Union v MSS Security Pty Ltd

Case [2025] FWC 2056


[2025] FWC 2056

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union
v

MSS Security Pty Ltd

(B2025/1139)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

MELBOURNE, 17 JULY 2025

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of MSS Security

  1. 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 MSS Security Pty Ltd (MSS or Employer).

  1. On 16 July 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer did not object to the Application. I observe that MSS, also constructively confirmed its commitment to further engage in the bargaining process with the UWU with a view to resolving the outstanding matters.

  1. In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

  1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Nicholas Richardson, 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 MSS, 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.

  1. The ballot is to be conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission.

  1. 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 28 August 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

  1. An Order has been separately issued in PR789705.

  1. 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, 30 working days from the making of the Order and was the period sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR789706>

Details
AGLC
United Workers' Union v MSS Security Pty Ltd [2025] FWC 2056
Case
[2025] FWC 2056
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The United Workers' Union sought an order from the Fair Work Commission for a protected action ballot under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, concerning certain employees of MSS Security Pty Ltd. MSS did not object to the application, and indicated a willingness to continue bargaining with the Union to resolve outstanding matters. The Deputy President Hampton decided to determine the matter on the papers, as MSS had constructively confirmed its commitment to the bargaining process. The Union had provided a declaration from a Trade Union Official stating that it had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with MSS.

The court had to decide whether all the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act had been met for the application to be valid. The Union argued that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement, and it had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with MSS. The Deputy President Hampton was satisfied that the Union had met all the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act, and therefore, granted the application. The court also set the closing date for voting in the ballot to 28 August 2025, which was 30 working days from the making of the Order. The Australian Electoral Commission would conduct the ballot.

The Fair Work Commission granted the United Workers' Union's application for a protected action ballot order, and set the closing date for voting in the ballot to 28 August 2025. The court determined that all the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act had been met, and that the Union had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with MSS. The court also determined that the ballot period for the purpose of section 448A(2) of the Act would be from the making of the Order until the closing date for voting. This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the compulsory conciliation conference. Directions may be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.