Benchmark WA Industrial Relations Case Database

Australian Federation of Air Pilots v Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd

[2021] FWC 627 Fair Work Commission 2021-01-01
Source
Deputy President Gostencnik
Not yet cited by other cases
Applicant: Australian Federation of Air Pilots
Respondent: Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd
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 (343 words)
1 Fair Work Act 2009 s.437—Protected action Australian Federation of Air Pilots v Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd (B2021/50) DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK MELBOURNE, 8 FEBRUARY 2021 Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd. [1] This is an application by the Australian Federation of Air Pilots (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Lloyd Helicopters Pty Ltd (Respondent). [2] On 8 February 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Mr D Stephens of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and is, 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] The Applicant sought that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission be the ballot agent for the protected action ballot. This course was not opposed by the Respondent. The person proposed in the application as the protected action ballot agent is TrueVote Pty Ltd (TrueVote). I am satisfied that TrueVote is a fit and proper person to conduct the ballot. I am also satisfied that TrueVote is capable of ensuring the secrecy and security of the votes and of conducting the ballot expeditiously. TrueVote has agreed to be the protected action ballot agent and is bound to comply with the Privacy Act 1998 with respect to the handling of the information relating to the protected action ballot. [6] Therefore I appoint TrueVote as the protected action ballot agent. [2021] FWC 627 DECISION [2021] FWC 627 2 [7] An order has been separately issued in PR726758. DEPUTY PRESIDENT Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer <PR726757>