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
Babcock Australia Pty Ltd
(B2021/757)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 6 SEPTEMBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Babcock Australia 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 (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Babcock Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 3 September 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 Dylan Wight 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 PR733565.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Babcock Australia Pty Ltd, the dispute centred around a proposed ballot of employees seeking to take protected industrial action. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The AMWU sought a declaration that the company had breached its obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) by failing to provide necessary information to facilitate a lawful ballot of its employees. Babcock Australia Pty Ltd argued that the union's ballot notice did not comply with the requirements of the Act and that the union's request for information was therefore invalid.

The court was required to determine whether the union's ballot notice was compliant with the Act and, if so, whether the company was obliged to provide the requested information. The central issue was whether the union's ballot notice was sufficiently specific to warrant disclosure of the requested employee information. The court examined the requirements of the Act and the practicalities of conducting a lawful ballot.

The court found that the union's ballot notice was sufficiently specific to warrant the provision of employee information, as it included details of the proposed industrial action, the employees who would be affected, and the period during which the ballot would be conducted. The court held that the company was obliged to provide the requested information, as the union's notice met the requirements of the Act. The court rejected the company's argument that the union's notice was too vague and ordered it to provide the necessary information to the union. This decision ensures that employees have access to the information necessary to make informed decisions about protected industrial action.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Babcock Australia 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