| [2021] FWC 6269 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action
“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU)
v
Altrad Services Pty Ltd
(B2021/1055)
VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI | SYDNEY, 5 NOVEMBER 2021 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Altrad Services Pty Ltd
[1] This is an application by the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) (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 Altrad Services Pty Ltd (Respondent).
[2] On 4 November 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 Simon Rushworth of the Applicant declared on 29 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 PR735496.
VICE PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR735497>
- AGLC
- “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Altrad Services Pty Ltd [2021] FWC 6269
- Case
- [2021] FWC 6269
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues the Commission had to determine were whether the AMWU's proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act and whether the proposed ballot was appropriate in the circumstances. Specifically, the Commission needed to consider whether the union had provided sufficient information to the employer and employees, whether the ballot notice was clear and accurate, and whether the proposed action was genuinely for the purpose of negotiating a new enterprise agreement or improving employees' conditions.
In assessing these issues, the Commission considered the evidence and submissions from both parties. The Commission found that the union's proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act, including the provision of a ballot notice that accurately described the proposed action and the purpose of the ballot. The Commission also determined that the proposed action was genuinely for the purpose of negotiating a new enterprise agreement or improving employees' conditions, as the union had provided evidence of the employer's proposed changes to workplace arrangements and the employees' concerns about those changes. Accordingly, the Commission authorised the AMWU to organise a ballot of the employees of Altrad Services.
The Fair Work Commission authorised the AMWU to organise a ballot of the employees of Altrad Services Pty Ltd, finding that the union's proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act and was genuinely for the purpose of negotiating a new enterprise agreement or improving employees' conditions. The Commission's decision confirms the importance of following the correct procedures when organising a ballot and the need for unions and employers to engage in good faith negotiations to resolve disputes over workplace arrangements.
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.