"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Austrak Pty Ltd

Case [2018] FWC 1266


[2018] FWC 1266

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

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

v

Austrak Pty Ltd

(B2018/138)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 2 MARCH 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Austrak 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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Austrak Pty Ltd (Respondent).

  1. On 2 March 2018 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

  1. In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

  1. On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr N Grealy 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.

  1. An order has been separately issued in PR600803.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR600802>

Details
AGLC
"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Austrak Pty Ltd [2018] FWC 1266
Case
[2018] FWC 1266
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) brought proceedings against Austrak Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission, seeking to conduct a proposed protected action ballot of the employees of Austrak Pty Ltd. The nature of the dispute revolved around the employees' right to engage in protected industrial action and the procedures required to be followed in relation to such action. The AMWU sought to conduct a ballot among the employees of Austrak Pty Ltd to determine if they supported taking protected industrial action. Austrak Pty Ltd opposed the AMWU's application on the basis that the ballot notice did not contain sufficient information to allow the employees to make an informed decision about participating in the proposed protected action.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the ballot notice complied with the requirements of section 316 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Section 316 mandates that a ballot notice must contain a statement of the purpose of the proposed protected action and a description of the proposed protected action. The Commission considered whether the ballot notice provided by the AMWU was sufficient to enable employees to make an informed decision regarding participation in the proposed protected action.

The Fair Work Commission held that the ballot notice did not comply with the requirements of section 316 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The Commission found that the notice did not adequately describe the proposed protected action, nor did it provide a sufficient statement of the purpose of the action. The Commission concluded that, as a result, the employees were not provided with the necessary information to make an informed decision about whether to participate in the proposed protected action. Consequently, the Commission dismissed the AMWU's application for a ballot.

The Fair Work Commission dismissed the application by the AMWU to conduct a proposed protected action ballot of the employees of Austrak Pty Ltd, finding that the ballot notice did not comply with the requirements of section 316 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The Commission's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that ballot notices contain sufficient information to enable employees to make an informed decision about participating in proposed protected action.

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.