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
Broadspectrum Ltd
(B2016/65)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 15 APRIL 2016

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Broadspectrum Ltd.

[1] This is an application by “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) (the Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Broadspectrum Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] On 16 April 2016 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 B Terzic of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent Company and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent Company, I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR579153.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), the union sought to conduct a ballot of employees of Broadspectrum Ltd for the purpose of organising protected industrial action. The dispute was heard and determined in the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The union argued that the proposed ballot was lawful and necessary to address unresolved issues in enterprise bargaining negotiations. Broadspectrum Ltd contested the ballot, contending that the union had not complied with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The FWC was tasked with determining whether the union's ballot complied with the legal framework and if the ballot was appropriately notified and conducted.

The FWC examined whether the union had given the requisite notice of the proposed ballot as stipulated in section 379 of the Act. The union argued that the notice provided was adequate and in accordance with the legal requirements. Broadspectrum Ltd contended that the notice did not comply with the procedural prerequisites and that the ballot should be invalidated. The FWC considered the evidence and submissions from both parties, assessing the compliance of the union's actions with the legislative provisions. The FWC found that while there were some deficiencies in the notice, they did not significantly impact the validity of the ballot.

After reviewing the evidence and arguments, the FWC determined that the union's ballot was generally compliant with the statutory requirements. The FWC concluded that the minor procedural issues did not render the ballot invalid. The union was permitted to proceed with the ballot, which was to be conducted in a manner that ensured fairness and transparency. The FWC's decision allowed the union to organise the proposed protected action, subject to the legal framework governing industrial action. This ruling underscores the importance of adherence to procedural requirements in organising industrial action while acknowledging that minor procedural errors do not necessarily invalidate the process.

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

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established