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
APT Management Services Pty Limited T/A APA Group
(B2021/945)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 7 OCTOBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of APT Management Services Pty Limited T/A APA Group

[1] This is an application by the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of APT Management Services Pty Limited T/A APA Group (Respondent).

[2] On 7 October 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 John Stewart 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] An order has been separately issued in PR734654.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought to conduct a protected action ballot among the employees of APT Management Services Pty Limited, trading as APA Group. The union aimed to facilitate industrial action against the employer, seeking to address what it claimed were unfair labour practices and unresolved workplace issues. The employer contested the union's application, arguing that the ballot was not a genuine step towards protected action and that the union had not provided sufficient evidence of its members' support for the proposed action.

The central legal issues before the Commission revolved around the requirements for conducting a protected action ballot under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine whether the union had satisfied the statutory prerequisites for such a ballot, including the necessity to show evidence of genuine support from the employees. The employer contended that the union had not adequately demonstrated this support, thus rendering the proposed ballot invalid. Additionally, the employer argued that the union's application did not meet the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act.

In its decision, the Commission carefully examined the union's application and the evidence presented regarding the employees' support for the proposed industrial action. The Commission found that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that a majority of the employees supported the proposed action, as required by the Act. Consequently, the Commission rejected the union's application for a protected action ballot. The employer's argument that the union's application did not comply with procedural requirements was also accepted, further supporting the Commission's decision to dismiss the application.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the union's application for a protected action ballot, concluding that the union had not met the statutory requirements for such a ballot. The Commission's decision was based on the lack of sufficient evidence of employee support and non-compliance with procedural requirements. No further action can be taken regarding this ballot without additional evidence and compliance with the Fair Work Act.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v APT Management Services Pty Limited T/A APA Group

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established