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

[2022] FWC 1909

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 Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd

(B2022/711)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 20 JULY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd.

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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 20 July 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Mr Raoul Wainwright 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.

An order has been separately issued in PR743984.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Fair Work Commission involved the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union,” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), which sought an order for a protected action ballot in relation to employees of Fonterra Brands (Australia) Pty Ltd. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, which pertains to protected action ballots. The dispute centered on the union's proposed industrial action, which was in response to ongoing negotiations with the employer that had not yielded an agreement.

The primary legal issue the Deputy President had to address was whether the AMWU had met the necessary requirements to conduct a protected action ballot. This included determining if the union had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with the employer and if the requisite notification period under section 443(1) of the Act had been satisfied. The union's declaration, provided by Mr. Raoul Wainwright, outlined the steps taken during the bargaining process and affirmed the union's efforts to reach an agreement with Fonterra Brands.

Upon reviewing the documentation, including Mr. Wainwright's declaration, the Deputy President found that the union had indeed met the requirements for a protected action ballot. The evidence demonstrated the union's genuine efforts to negotiate and the compliance with the notification period. With the employer not opposing the application, the Deputy President decided to proceed with the determination based on the submitted papers without the need for a hearing. Consequently, the application was approved, and an order was issued in relation to the proposed agreement.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established