United Workers' Union v Wilson Security Pty Ltd T/A Wilson Security Summary

[2023] FWC 2910

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.448 - Application for revocation of protected action ballot order

United Workers' Union
v

Wilson Security Pty Ltd T/A Wilson Security

(B2023/1216)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT WRIGHT

SYDNEY, 6 NOVEMBER 2023

Application for a revocation of a Protected Action Ballot Order in B2023/1171

A protection action ballot order was issued on 27 October 2023.[1] The ballot has not yet been conducted.

The United Workers’ Union, being the applicant in this matter, has made an application under s.448 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to revoke the order.

Section 448 of the Act provides that:

“448 Revocation of protected action ballot order
(1)An applicant for a protected action ballot order may apply to the FWC, at any time before voting in the protected action ballot closes, to revoke the order.
(2)If an application to revoke a protected action ballot order is made, the FWC must revoke the order.”

The requirements of s.448 have been met and the Commission is obliged to revoke the order.

The protected action ballot order made in matter B2023/1171 is hereby revoked.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

[1] PR767660.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of United Workers' Union v Wilson Security Pty Ltd T/A Wilson Security, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) was tasked with determining whether to revoke a previously issued protected action ballot order. The applicant, United Workers' Union, sought to have the order revoked under s.448 of the Fair Work Act 2009, before the ballot had been conducted. The ballot order had been issued on 27 October 2023, and no ballot had been conducted as of the date of the decision.

The legal issues before the court were straightforward: whether the requirements of s.448 of the Act had been satisfied, thereby obliging the FWC to revoke the order. Section 448 of the Act provides that an applicant for a protected action ballot order can apply to the FWC to revoke the order at any time before voting in the ballot closes, and if such an application is made, the FWC must revoke the order.

The FWC found that the requirements of s.448 had indeed been met, as the application to revoke the order was made before the ballot closed. Therefore, the Commission was obliged to revoke the protected action ballot order made in matter B2023/1171. The decision was made on 6 November 2023 by Deputy President Wright in Sydney.

The protected action ballot order made in matter B2023/1171 is hereby revoked. This decision underscores the importance of timely applications under s.448 and the FWC's obligation to act upon such applications to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Act.

United Workers' Union v Wilson Security Pty Ltd T/A Wilson Security

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established