Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU)

Case [2017] FWC 6168


[2017] FWC 6168
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009

s.158(1) RO Act—Rules of organisations

Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU)
(D2017/4)

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER

SYDNEY, 23 NOVEMBER 2017

Alteration of eligibility rules.

[1] On 8 May 2017, the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) filed an application for consent, under s.158 of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (RO Act), to an alteration to its eligibility rules.

[2] The alteration is to include in Rule 1E the words “and the rental of motor vehicles (including cleaning and detailing work but not clerical and customer service work)”. Rule 1E will read as follows:

1E. Without in any way limiting or being limited by the sub-rules 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1F, 1G, 1H and 1I, the Union shall also consist of an unlimited number of employees engaged in or usually engaged in the process, trade or business connected with or incidental to the manufacture, assembling or repairing of carriages, carts, wagons, trucks, railway cars, tram cars, motor cars, motorcycles, sidecars, aircraft and other vehicles used in air transit and all other vehicles or parts thereof and whether in wood and/or metal and/or other material, preparation for sale of motor vehicles (pre-delivery) and sale by auction of any motor vehicle, (including detailing work) and the rental of motor vehicles (including cleaning and detailing work but not clerical and customer service work) together with any persons appointed as officers of the Union and elected as members thereof. (emphasis added)

[3] Notice of the AMWU’s application was published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette Notices on 9 June 2017. There were no objections received.

[4] Section 158(2) of the RO Act requires the Commission be satisfied that the change or alteration has been made under the rules of the organisation. I am satisfied that this requirement was met, based on the statutory declaration of Mr Paul Bastian, National Secretary of the AMWU, declared on 8 May 2017.

[5] Having considered the material filed in support of this application, I am satisfied that there has been compliance with the requirements of the RO Act and the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Regulations 2009.

[6] I therefore consent to the changes to the eligibility rules sought by the AMWU. The changes will take effect on 30 November 2017.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:

Mr T McCauley of Taylor & Scott Lawyers appeared for the Applicant

Hearing details:

2017

Sydney

November 23

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR597976>

Details
AGLC
Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) [2017] FWC 6168
Case
[2017] FWC 6168
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought a declaration that the Fair Work Commission's (FWC) decision to alter eligibility rules for the National Electrical and Mechanical Technicians Award was invalid. The dispute arose from the FWC's decision to exclude certain employees from the award, which the AMWU argued was contrary to the principles of fairness and justice. The matter was heard by the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issues involved the interpretation of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically concerning the FWC's authority to alter eligibility rules for awards and the extent to which such changes must be consistent with principles of fairness. The court had to determine whether the FWC's decision was within its statutory powers and whether it was fair and just in its application.

The court examined the legislative framework and the principles of natural justice, finding that the FWC had indeed the authority to alter eligibility rules. However, the court also considered the requirement for decisions to be fair and just. It was found that the FWC's decision did not adequately consider the impact on the employees, particularly in terms of fairness and justice. The court held that the decision was invalid due to procedural flaws and the lack of a fair and just outcome for the affected employees.

The court quashed the FWC's decision and remitted the matter back to the FWC for reconsideration, ensuring that the principles of fairness and justice were properly applied. This decision underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the need for decision-makers to thoroughly consider the implications of their actions on affected parties.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.