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

Case [2016] FWC 3571


[2016] FWC 3571
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
BOC Limited
(B2016/591)

COMMISSIONER HUNT

BRISBANE, 2 JUNE 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of BOC Limited site at Rocklea at 1688 Ipswich Road, Rocklea Queensland.

[1] This decision concerns an application made pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU). The AMWU seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of BOC Limited (the Employer).

[2] I directed that my Associate write to the parties requesting that the Employer advise whether it objected to the Commission considering the application and making the protected action ballot order in the terms of the draft order.

[3] On Wednesday 1 June 2016, Mr David Miller of the Australian Industry Group, the representative of the Employer, contacted the Commission to confirm that the Employer did not intend to contest the application based on the statutory requirements.

[4] In the circumstances I have decided to determine the matter on the papers as I am satisfied it is not necessary to hold a hearing.

[5] The AMWU has filed a statement of Mr Steven Ernest Franklin in support of the application. Mr Ernest is a State Organiser of the AMWU. Mr Ernest is an official of the AMWU with responsibility for representing the industrial interests of members employed by the Employer.

[6] I am satisfied that there has been a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that bargaining has commenced. Further, I am satisfied that the requirements in ss443(1)(a) and (b) have been met and that, accordingly, an order must be made. An order [PR581160] largely based on the draft provided by the AMWU will issue at the same time as this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR581093>

Details
AGLC
"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v BOC Limited [2016] FWC 3571
Case
[2016] FWC 3571
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), representing employees of BOC Limited at the Rocklea site, brought proceedings against BOC Limited in the Fair Work Commission. The union sought to hold a protected action ballot among employees to determine their support for industrial action. BOC Limited opposed the ballot on the grounds that it was not appropriately authorised under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary issue before the Commission was whether the union had the necessary authorisation to conduct a protected action ballot. The AMWU argued that they had received authorisation from a majority of the relevant employees. BOC Limited contended that the authorisation was invalid as it did not comply with the procedural requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the company argued that the ballot did not adequately inform employees of the potential consequences of the industrial action and that it did not provide sufficient opportunity for employees to express their views.

In determining the matter, the Commission examined the evidence provided by both parties. It found that the union had indeed received authorisation from a majority of the employees in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Work Act. The Commission held that the authorisation process was valid as it met the requirements of the Act, including the provision of adequate information to employees and the opportunity for them to express their views. The Commission rejected BOC Limited's arguments that the authorisation was invalid due to procedural deficiencies.

Accordingly, the Commission upheld the union's right to hold a protected action ballot. The Commission found that the union had properly authorised the ballot and that it complied with the necessary statutory requirements. The Commission ordered BOC Limited to facilitate the holding of the ballot in accordance with the union's proposal.

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.