United Workers' Union v Woolworths Group Limited, Queensland Properties Investments Pty Limited

[2022] FWC 3023

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

United Workers’ Union
v

Woolworths Group Limited, Queensland Properties Investments Pty Limited

(B2022/1710)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 15 NOVEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Woolworths Group Limited and Queensland Properties Investments Pty Limited

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 Woolworths Group Limited, Queensland Properties Investments Pty Limited (Respondent).

On 14 November 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 Gulsen Kamber of the Applicant declared on 12 November 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 PR747930.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission (FWC) was presented with an application by the United Workers' Union (UWU) under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) seeking an order for a protected action ballot concerning employees of Woolworths Group Limited and Queensland Properties Investments Pty Limited. The application was made in the context of ongoing bargaining efforts between the UWU and the Respondents, with the union asserting that it had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement. The Respondents did not oppose the application, leading the Vice President of the FWC, Catanzariti, to determine the matter on the submitted documents without the need for a hearing.

The primary legal issues before the FWC were whether the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met and whether the UWU had satisfied the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act. The FWC had to assess the UWU's statutory declaration and other provided evidence to determine if the union had genuinely tried to reach an agreement and if the requisite notification period for the proposed agreement had been observed. The UWU argued that it fulfilled the necessary conditions, and the Respondents did not present any counterarguments.

In examining the statutory declaration and the supporting documents, Vice President Catanzariti concluded that the UWU had genuinely engaged in bargaining efforts and met the statutory notification period requirements. The Vice President was satisfied that the union had taken the necessary steps in its negotiations with the Respondents and had adhered to the procedural requirements set forth in the Act. This satisfaction was based on the evidence presented in the statutory declaration by Gulsen Kamber of the UWU, which detailed the union's bargaining efforts and compliance with the legislative provisions.

Consequently, the FWC issued an order in PR747930, allowing the UWU to proceed with the protected action ballot. This decision was made on 15 November 2022, and the order was issued separately, as referenced in PR747931. The outcome confirmed the UWU's eligibility to conduct a ballot under the circumstances presented.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established