| [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.
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).
On 2 March 2018 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.
In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.
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.
An order has been separately issued in PR600803.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR600802>
- 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 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.