Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 13 APRIL 2021

When is it worth opposing protected action ballot orders in Fair Work Commission proceedings?

Piper Alderman
Piper Alderman
Contributor
Piper Alderman

Piper Alderman

Helping shape the future of business in Australia with practical, commercial and cutting-edge legal...

View firm profile
Explore more from Piper Alderman

Protected action can arise in many forms. Discussion & key takeaways from recent PABO case.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Protected action can arise in many forms and pose a challenge to an employer's operation of their business. The potential for disruption and other risks, such as operational critical or safety risks, are even more clear when that protected action includes proposed partial work bans which are devoid of detail.

In the recent decision of Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Prosegur Australia Pty Ltd [2021] FWCFB 1562, the employer successfully defended an appeal against a decision at first instance concluding that a particular ballot question did not describe the proposed industrial action in a way that employees would be capable of responding. The single-member Commission decision in Transport Workers' Union of Australia v Prosegur Australia Pty Ltd [2021] FWC 645 had determined that the proposed question failed to express the proposed action with sufficient clarity to enable the employees to make an informed choice as to whether to support the proposed action.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from