United Workers' Union v Nestle Australia Ltd T/A Nestle Purina Petcare

[2021] FWC 35

[2021] FWC 35

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v
Nestle Australia Ltd T/A Nestle Purina Petcare
(B2020/856)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK MELBOURNE, 11 JANUARY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Nestle Purina Petcare.

[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 Nestle Australia Ltd T/A Nestle Purina Petcare (Respondent).

[2] On 23 December 2020, the Respondent notified my Associate that it sought several amendments to the Applicant’s draft order. On 5 January 2021, the Applicant filed an amended draft order, incorporating a number of the Respondent’s requested amendments. Later that day the Respondent notified my Associate that it does not object to the application, subject to two further amendments to the order to which the Applicant consented. The Respondent subsequently sought two further amendments to the draft order, which the Applicant consented to on 11 January 2021.

[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 Martin 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] The Applicant also sought that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) be the ballot agent for the protected action ballot. This course was not opposed by the Respondent. The person proposed in the application as the protected action ballot agent is Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd trading as CiVS (CiVS). Mr Michael M Michael, the Managing Director of CiVs has provided a statutory declaration setting out that he would carry out the functions of the protected ballot agent for CiVS, and that he has relevant experience in conducting protected action ballots. I am satisfied that CiVS is a fit and proper person to conduct the ballot. I am also satisfied that Mr Michael and CiVS are capable of ensuring the secrecy and security of the votes and of conducting the ballot expeditiously. CiVs has agreed to be the protected action ballot agent and Mr Michael and CiVS are bound to comply with the Privacy Act 1998 with respect to the handling of the information relating to the protected action ballot.

[6] Therefore, I appoint CiVS as the protected action ballot agent.

[7] An order has been separately issued in PR725983.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR725956>