Employer PABO non-compliance not deliberate but still attracts $45,000 fine On 30 April 2024 Judge Bromwich of the Federal Court handed down the decision in Transport Workers’ Union of Australia v Cleanaway Operations Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 443, imposing a $45,000 civil penalty on an Employer that failed to supply employee information to the appointed…
“It’s not about the convenience of the Commission”- PABO timing must be expeditious and practicable. Fair Work Commission (FWC) Deputy President Hampton’s observations in this case demonstrated the FWC’s commitment to expedience while providing clarity on the acceptable timeframe for conducting protected action ballots – a matter that has seen contention between unions and employers. …
An ‘access period’ Case Study – S & D Logistics Pty Ltd In a recent and notable case, the Fair Work Commission scrutinised the Enterprise Agreement process between S & D Logistics Pty Ltd and its employees, represented by the Australian Meat Industry Employees Union (AMIEU). This case highlights the complexities and at times nuances in…
Industrial Action Halted Due to Ballot Error Key Takeaways 1. Precision is essential for Balloting Agents: The incident highlights the critical need for precision in the balloting process for protected action ballots, including in the provision of the Ballot Report. 2. Role of Fair Work Commission: The Fair Work Commission relies upon the accuracy and integrity of…
FWC Rules Against Employer’s Privacy Concerns Mandates Worker Details Sharing for Protected Action Ballot Key Takeaways 1. Importance of Transparency in PABO: The FWC decision in TWU v Clark’s Logan City Bus Services (Qld) [2023] FWC 1721 emphasizes the significance of transparency in protected action ballots, insisting that an Employer share employee details to maintain the…
FWC decision provides clear direction about the role of the ‘Access period’. A lack of clarity and timeliness in employee communication leads to FWC Rejection.