United Workers' Union v Serco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Serco Australia Pty Ltd

[2024] FWC 878

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union
v

Serco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Serco Australia Pty Ltd

(B2024/407)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT WRIGHT

SYDNEY, 5 APRIL 2024

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Serco Australia Pty Limited

This is an application by the United Workers’ Union (Applicant or UWU) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Serco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Serco Australia Pty Ltd (Employer).

On 5 April 2024, the Commission was advised that the Employer did not object to the Application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Darren Roberts, Organiser at UWU, setting out the steps taken by the Applicant in bargaining with the Employer and that they have been, and are, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Employer, 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.

The ballot is to be conducted by the Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd T/A CiVS (CiVS). CiVS has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act[1] and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.

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 19 April 2024.[2] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

An Order has been separately issued in PR773207.

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 involved 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] Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd T/A CiVS [2023] FWC 1400.

[2] This is the date sought in the application.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The United Workers’ Union (Applicant or UWU) sought an order for a protected action ballot concerning certain employees of Serco Australia Pty Ltd T/A Serco Australia Pty Ltd (Employer). This application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act). The application was heard by Deputy President Wright in the Fair Work Commission on 5 April 2024. The Employer did not object to the Application, leading the Commission to decide on the matter based on the submitted papers without holding a hearing.

The legal issues in this case revolved around whether the UWU had met the requirements for a protected action ballot under section 443 of the Act. This includes verifying if the UWU had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the Employer and if all procedural requirements were met. The Deputy President examined the declaration by Darren Roberts, an Organiser at UWU, which detailed the bargaining efforts with the Employer. The declaration confirmed that the UWU had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement and that all procedural requirements were fulfilled. The Commission also acknowledged that Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd T/A CiVS (CiVS) was an approved ballot agent under section 468A of the Act.

Upon reviewing the material, Deputy President Wright determined that all requirements for a protected action ballot were satisfied. The Commission set the voting closure date for 19 April 2024, establishing the ballot period as per section 448A(2) of the Act. Additionally, the matter was assigned to another Member of the Commission for a compulsory conciliation conference under section 448A, which would require the attendance of all bargaining representatives involved in the proposed enterprise agreement. This conference aimed to ensure meaningful negotiations between the parties. An order was also issued separately in PR773207.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established