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
Danone Murray Goulburn Pty Limited
(B2021/22)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 20 JANUARY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Danone Murray Goulburn Pty Limited.

[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 Danone Murray Goulburn Pty Limited (Respondent).

[2] On 20 January 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent does 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 Barry Terzic 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 PR726310.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) and Danone Murray Goulburn Pty Limited. The AMWU sought to conduct a ballot of employees regarding proposed protected action, which Danone Murray Goulburn opposed. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission, which has jurisdiction over employment disputes in Australia. The AMWU, representing employees of Danone Murray Goulburn, sought to organise a ballot to gauge support for potential industrial action, including strikes or stoppages. Danone Murray Goulburn contested the ballot, arguing that the AMWU did not meet the necessary criteria to conduct such a ballot under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue was whether the AMWU had the requisite support from employees to conduct a ballot. Under the Fair Work Act, a union must have the support of at least 40% of the employees in the relevant bargaining unit to conduct a lawful ballot. The Commission had to determine if the AMWU had gathered sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it had the necessary support. The evidence presented included signed authorisation forms from employees and declarations from union officials. The court examined the validity of the authorisation forms and whether they complied with the legal requirements, including the need for independent verification.

The Fair Work Commission concluded that the AMWU had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it had the requisite support from employees to conduct the ballot. The authorisation forms submitted were not independently verified, and the declarations from union officials were deemed insufficient to meet the legal requirements. Consequently, the Commission ruled that the AMWU could not proceed with the ballot. The decision was based on the procedural requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act, which prioritise the protection of employees' rights and the integrity of the ballot process.

The Commission ordered that the proposed ballot by the AMWU be disallowed, and it directed that no further action be taken to organise the ballot without meeting the statutory requirements. This ruling emphasised the importance of strict compliance with the legislative framework governing industrial action in Australia.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Danone Murray Goulburn Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established