Benchmark WA Industrial Relations Case Database

Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Cannon Hill Services Pty Limited T/A Australian Country Choice

[2020] FWC 4114 Fair Work Commission 2020-01-01
Source
Vice President Catanzariti
Not yet cited by other cases
Applicant: Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union
Respondent: Cannon Hill Services Pty Limited T/A Australian Country Choice
This case hasn't been analysed yet.
Generate ratio, outcome, key facts, concept tags and cited-case edges. Takes ~15–30 seconds.
Sign in to analyse

Authority signal

Not yet cited by other cases Signal-weighted score: 0.0
Derived from how later decisions have treated this case. Dark green = leading authority, green = positively treated, grey = neutral or sparse data, amber = caution, red = treated negatively.

Concept tags · 4

[P]Protected action ballot order [P]Protected industrial action [S]Good faith bargaining [S]Declaration
Archived text (245 words)
1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order The Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Cannon Hill Services Pty Limited T/A Australian Country Choice (B2020/415) VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI SYDNEY, 6 AUGUST 2020 Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Cannon Hill Services Pty Limited T/A Australian Country Choice. [1] This is an application by The Australasian Meat Industry Employees 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 Cannon Hill Services Pty Limited T/A Australian Country Choice (Respondent). [2] On 5 August 2020, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application. [3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing. [4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr James Peter Cottrell-Dormer of the Applicant declared on 4 August 2020, setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and are, 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. [5] An Order has been separately issued in PR721586. VICE PRESIDENT [2020] FWC 4114 DECISION [2020] FWC 4114 2 Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR721585>