ENTERPRISE BARGAINING – protected action ballot – ss.412, 437, 443 Fair Work Act 2009 – applications by National Union of Workers (NUW) for protected action ballot orders (PABOs) granted by Commission – reasons for decision – Commission heard applications for PABOs concerning employees at three different locations (Laverton North, Barnawartha, Broadmeadows) who would be covered by three separate enterprise agreements – respondents to each application are subsidiaries of one company – NUW had suggested to each respondent that parties engage in a ‘two stream’ bargaining process which would involve delegates from each locations consider issues common to all locations, and then see delegates from each individual location consider remainder of issues – respondent opposed this approach – parties commenced bargaining – NUW sought PABOs – respondents submitted NUW engaging in pattern bargaining – NUW submitted it was genuinely seeking agreement with respective employers at each site – fact that NUW has a ‘multi-site bargaining policy’ does not of itself contradict this assertion, nor does co-ordinated nature of PABO application – Commission not satisfied NUW pursuing uniform claims at the three sites – respondents also claimed NUW pursuing claims not pertaining to the employment relationship by seeking restrictions on outsourcing and use of contractors – case law highlighted by respondents did not support this contention – not necessary to finally determine whether these matters pertain to employment relationship as such matters only relevant to determination of application and not determinative of it – Commission satisfied NUW genuinely trying to reach agreement – no exceptional circumstances warranting extension of three day notice period – PABOs granted. National Union of Workers v Woolstar P/L and Anor
…
