United Workers' Union v TE Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd Summary

[2022] FWC 623

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v

TE Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd

(B2022/209)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 21 MARCH 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of TE Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd

This is an application by the United Workers’ Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of TE Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 18 March 2022, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose 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 statutory declaration of Alex Suhle of the Applicant declared on 16 March 2022, 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.

An Order has been separately issued in PR739503.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The United Workers' Union (Applicant) sought a protected action ballot order under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 in relation to certain employees of TE Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent). The Respondent did not oppose the application. The dispute centred around the proposed industrial action of the employees, which was intended to be balloted. The matter was determined by the Fair Work Commission on the basis of the materials submitted, including the statutory declaration by Alex Suhle of the Applicant, which detailed the bargaining process and the Union's efforts to reach an agreement with the Respondent.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met and whether the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act were satisfied. The Court had to consider the statutory declaration and other materials submitted to determine if the Union had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with the Respondent and if the notification time for the proposed agreement was met. The Court also needed to assess whether the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act were fulfilled, which included the necessity for a ballot to be held for the proposed protected action.

In making its decision, the Court found that the notification time in relation to the proposed agreement had been met and that the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act had been satisfied. The Court was satisfied with the evidence provided, including the statutory declaration, which outlined the Union's efforts in bargaining with the Respondent and its genuine attempts to reach an agreement. The Court determined that the Union had met the necessary criteria for a protected action ballot order and issued an order in PR739503. The Court decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing, given that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

United Workers' Union v TE Connectivity Australia Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established