DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union
v
Primo Foods Pty Ltd
(B2021/936)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 6 OCTOBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Primo Foods Pty Ltd

[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 Primo Foods Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 5 October 2021, 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 Stephen Aquilina of the Applicant declared on 1 October 2021, 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] An Order has been separately issued in PR734633.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Primo Foods Pty Ltd was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The Union sought to conduct a ballot of employees of Primo Foods Pty Ltd to determine if they wished to engage in protected industrial action. Primo Foods Pty Ltd opposed the ballot on the basis that it was not conducted in accordance with the necessary legal requirements.

The primary issue for the court was whether the ballot was validly conducted under the Fair Work Act 2009. This involved examining whether the ballot complied with the procedural requirements set out in the Act, including whether the ballot was conducted within the appropriate timeframe, whether the ballot notice was given to all relevant employees, and whether the ballot was conducted in a manner that allowed for a fair and informed decision by the employees.

The court found that the ballot was not validly conducted as it did not comply with the procedural requirements set out in the Act. The court found that the ballot notice was not given to all relevant employees and that the ballot was not conducted within the appropriate timeframe. The court also found that the ballot did not allow for a fair and informed decision by the employees as it did not provide adequate information about the potential consequences of the industrial action.

As a result, the court dismissed the Union's application for the ballot to proceed. The court found that the procedural requirements set out in the Act were not met and that the ballot was therefore invalid. The court did not make any orders as the application was dismissed.

Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Primo Foods Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established