DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union
v
Officeworks Business Direct Pty Ltd
(B2020/311)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 15 JUNE 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Officeworks Business Direct 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 Officeworks Business Direct Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 15 June 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 Ms A Thwaites 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 PR720218.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The United Workers' Union sought an order for Officeworks Business Direct Pty Ltd to conduct a ballot of its employees to ascertain if they would support industrial action. The application was brought in the Fair Work Commission. The Union alleged that the employees of Officeworks had been subject to a reduction in their wages and conditions and that it was necessary to consult the employees to determine their support for potential industrial action. Officeworks opposed the application, arguing that the Union had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the employees would support industrial action. The Commission was required to determine whether the Union had established a reasonable basis for conducting a ballot of the employees. The Commission considered the evidence provided by the Union and concluded that there was a reasonable basis for the employees to support industrial action. The Commission found that the Union had demonstrated that there had been a change in the employees' terms and conditions of employment, which had resulted in a detriment to the employees. The Commission also found that the Union had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the employees were likely to support industrial action. The Commission ordered Officeworks to conduct a ballot of its employees to ascertain their support for industrial action. The Union's application was successful, and Officeworks was ordered to conduct a ballot of its employees to determine if they would support industrial action. The Court found that the Union had established a reasonable basis for the ballot and that the detriment to the employees was sufficient to warrant a ballot. The Court also found that the Union had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the employees were likely to support industrial action. Officeworks was ordered to conduct a ballot of its employees within 28 days of the Commission's decision.

United Workers' Union v Officeworks Business Direct 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