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

[2013] FWC 8486

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
Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd
(B2013/267)

COMMISSIONER RYAN

MELBOURNE, 28 OCTOBER 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application for a protected action ballot of members of “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) employed by Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd (the employer).

[2] Ms Kelli Sullivan, Regional HR Manager for the employer, has advised my chambers that the employer does not oppose this application.

[3] The AMWU has filed a Statutory Declaration of Barry Terzic in support of this application. I am satisfied that the AMWU has demonstrated that it has been and is genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer.

[4] In the circumstances I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

[5] I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 have been met and that, accordingly, an order must be made. An order based on the draft order provided by the AMWU has issued in conjunction with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought an order to compel Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd to facilitate a proposed protected action ballot among its employees. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The central issue was whether the union could proceed with a proposed industrial action ballot without the employer's assistance. The dispute centred on the employer's obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to reasonably cooperate with the union in facilitating such a ballot.

The Commission considered the employer's obligations and whether there was a reasonable basis for the union's proposed action. The AMWU argued that the employer's refusal to assist in the ballot was unreasonable and a breach of the Act. Fonterra contended that it had acted reasonably by providing information to the union, including employee contact details, but did not wish to be involved in the ballot process itself. The Commission found that while the employer had provided necessary information, its refusal to facilitate the ballot directly was unreasonable. The AMWU's proposed action was considered reasonable given the circumstances, and the employer's failure to cooperate was deemed unjustified. Consequently, the Commission ordered Fonterra to facilitate the ballot as requested by the AMWU.

The Fair Work Commission ordered Fonterra Australia Pty Ltd to facilitate the proposed protected action ballot by the AMWU. This included providing access to employee contact details and other necessary information to ensure the ballot could proceed. The decision underscored the importance of reasonable cooperation between employers and unions in facilitating industrial action, as mandated by the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established