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

[2013] FWC 2257

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
FMP Group (Australia) Pty Ltd
(B2013/82)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 12 APRIL 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of FMP Group (Australia) 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 (the AMWU) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of FMP Group (Australia) Pty Ltd (the respondent).

[2] On 11 April 2013 my associate was advised by the respondent that it was aware of the application and would not oppose 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 unchallenged submissions 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 the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met. Accordingly, I will make an order. The order [PR535586] is based on the draft orders provided by the AMWU with its application but does not include proposed paragraph 3.2 of the draft order as in my view, no utility is served by including that paragraph in the final order.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) brought an application against FMP Group (Australia) Pty Ltd before the Fair Work Commission, seeking authorisation for a protected action ballot. The dispute revolves around the employees' desire to take protected action in response to issues pertaining to their employment conditions. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed industrial action was protected action, as defined by the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue the Commission had to address was whether the proposed industrial action by the employees was protected action within the meaning of the Act. Specifically, the Commission needed to examine whether the proposed industrial action met the requirements set out in section 387 of the Act, which outlines the conditions for protected action. The Commission had to consider whether the action was in relation to a workplace dispute and whether it was protected action of a kind specified in the Act.

The Commission found that the proposed industrial action by the employees was indeed protected action as it related to a genuine workplace dispute. The Commission determined that the employees' concerns about their employment conditions constituted a legitimate issue, and the proposed action was a reasonable response to that dispute. The Commission also found that the proposed industrial action met the criteria set out in the Act for protected action, including the requirement that it be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Act. As a result, the Commission authorised the AMWU to conduct the protected action ballot as proposed.

The Fair Work Commission authorised the AMWU to conduct the protected action ballot, as it found the proposed industrial action to be protected action under the Fair Work Act. The Commission's decision ensures that the employees can exercise their rights to take protected action in relation to their workplace dispute, provided that it complies with the requirements of the Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established