ENTERPRISE BARGAINING – protected action ballot – ss.437, 443 Fair Work Act 2009 – application for protected action ballot order (PABO) – valid application made – respondent objected to application on the basis applicant had not genuinely tried to reach agreement – respondent further submitted that if PABO made, written notice be longer than three working days – respondent submitted preconditions in s.443(1)(b) of FW Act not met as applicant refused to provide reasons for rejecting multiple proposals advanced by respondent and consistently delayed bargaining – Commission considered failure or refusal to accept respondent’s claims does not mean applicant had not been trying to reach agreement – not an unusual phenomena of bargaining – totality of circumstances to be considered – no evidence put forward to demonstrate that the applicant had been dragging its heels – Commission of the view that applicant was genuinely trying to reach an agreement – respondent failed to discharge onus of establishing exceptional circumstances to extend period of written notice – protection ballot order to be issued – order made. Australian Workers’ Union, The v Winchester Australia Ltd
…
