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
Autocare Services Pty Ltd
(B2019/237)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 26 MARCH 2019

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

[2] On 25 March 2019, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr D Smith 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 PR706175.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, also known as the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, initiated proceedings against Autocare Services Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The union sought to conduct a ballot of employees for proposed protected action, which the employer contested on the grounds that the ballot notice was insufficiently detailed. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the union's ballot notice met the requisite standards under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the ballot notice provided by the union was adequate in terms of detail and clarity. The employer argued that the notice did not sufficiently inform employees about the proposed action, its implications, and other necessary particulars. The union contended that the notice was adequate and that it had fulfilled its obligations under the Act. The Commission needed to assess the sufficiency of the notice against the statutory requirements to decide if the proposed ballot could proceed.

The Fair Work Commission examined the content of the ballot notice and found that it contained the essential information required by section 359 of the Act, including a clear description of the proposed action and the period during which it was intended to occur. The Commission noted that the notice was designed to inform employees of the union's intention to take protected action and to seek their approval. While the employer raised concerns about the detail, the Commission determined that the notice sufficiently met the statutory requirements for a ballot. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the union and authorised the proposed ballot.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed ballot of employees of Autocare Services Pty Ltd by the AMWU could proceed. The Commission emphasised that the notice provided by the union was adequate under the Fair Work Act, thereby allowing the ballot to be conducted to ascertain the employees' support for the proposed protected action.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Autocare Services Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established