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
Commonwealth Steel Pty Ltd T/A Moly-Cop Australasia
(B2021/959)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 12 OCTOBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Commonwealth Steel Pty Ltd T/A Moly-Cop Australasia

[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 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Commonwealth Steel Pty Ltd T/A Moly-Cop Australasia (Respondent).

[2] On 7 October 2021, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose 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 statutory declaration of Brad Pidgeon of the Applicant declared on 6 October 2021, 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 PR734793.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought an order for a ballot of the employees of Commonwealth Steel Pty Ltd T/A Moly-Cop Australasia to be held in relation to protected action. The Commonwealth Steel Pty Ltd T/A Moly-Cop Australasia contested the application. The dispute was heard by the Fair Work Commission. The central issue was whether the union had satisfied the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) for holding a protected action ballot. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the union had demonstrated that the proposed action was in relation to a workplace matter and whether the ballot was necessary and reasonable under the circumstances.

The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence provided by the union regarding the nature of the proposed action and the workplace matters involved. The union argued that the ballot was necessary to enable employees to express their views on proposed changes to their employment conditions. The employer contended that the ballot was not necessary as the employees' rights and obligations were adequately protected under existing agreements. The Commission concluded that the union had established the requisite workplace matters and that the proposed action was directly related to these issues. The Commission further found that the ballot was necessary and reasonable given the circumstances, including the significant changes to employment conditions proposed by the employer.

In light of the findings, the Fair Work Commission ordered that a ballot of the employees be held to determine whether they supported the proposed protected action. The Commission's decision was based on the balance of probabilities, finding that the union had met the statutory requirements for a protected action ballot. The employer's objections were overruled, and the order for the ballot was made. The final orders included specific directions for the conduct of the ballot, ensuring it was conducted in a fair and transparent manner.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Commonwealth Steel Pty Ltd T/A Moly-Cop Australasia

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established