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

[2020] FWC 1470

[2020] FWC 1470

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

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
BCS Infrastructure Support Pty Ltd
(B2020/169)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK MELBOURNE, 19 MARCH 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of BCS Infrastructure Support 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 BCS Infrastructure Support Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 18 March 2020, my Associate was advised that the Respondent objected to the application on the grounds that it disagreed with statements made in the statutory declaration of Mr J Gardner in support of the claim that the Applicant was genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent, the effect the COVID-19 pandemic is currently having on the aviation industry and errors in the draft order filed with the application.

[3] I sought the views of the Applicant in relation to the issues raised by the Respondent. The Applicant stated that the information referred to by the Respondent does not indicate that the Applicant is not genuinely trying to reach an agreement and noted that the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic is not a relevant consideration for the making of a protected action ballot order application. An amended draft order was filed by the Applicant.

[4] On 19 March 2020 my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not wish to press the objections.

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

[6] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr J Gardner 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. The Respondent has not identified any statutory basis for its objection.

[7] An order has been separately issued in PR717627.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR717626>