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
Gruma Oceania Pty Ltd
(B2021/90)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 18 FEBRUARY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Gruma Oceania 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 (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 Gruma Oceania Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 18 February 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did 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 Mr B 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 PR727122.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought a declaration and injunction in the Federal Court of Australia against Gruma Oceania Pty Ltd, asserting that the company had contravened the Fair Work Act 2009 by failing to comply with certain procedural requirements before implementing changes to its employees' conditions of employment. The AMWU sought a protected action ballot of the employees to be able to take industrial action. The union argued that Gruma Oceania had not followed the mandated processes and thus had failed to provide the necessary information to the employees to enable them to make an informed decision regarding the ballot. Gruma Oceania, on the other hand, contended that it had fulfilled all its obligations under the Fair Work Act and that the union's application should be dismissed on that basis.

The court had to determine whether Gruma Oceania had breached its legal obligations under the Fair Work Act by failing to adhere to the prescribed procedures before implementing the changes to employees' conditions. The key issue was whether the company had provided the employees with all the necessary information to make an informed decision about the proposed industrial action. The court examined the provisions of the Fair Work Act, the relevant case law, and the evidence presented by both parties to assess Gruma Oceania's compliance with the procedural requirements. The union argued that the company had not followed the correct procedures, while Gruma Oceania maintained that it had fulfilled its obligations under the Act.

The court found that Gruma Oceania had not fully complied with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. It determined that the company had failed to provide the employees with all the necessary information to make an informed decision about the proposed industrial action. Consequently, the court held that Gruma Oceania had breached its legal obligations under the Act. The court granted the AMWU's application for a declaration and injunction, ruling that Gruma Oceania must comply with the necessary procedures before implementing any changes to employees' conditions. This decision emphasised the importance of adhering to the Fair Work Act's procedural requirements and the consequences of failing to do so.

Gruma Oceania was ordered to comply with the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act and to provide the necessary information to the employees to enable them to make an informed decision regarding the proposed industrial action. The court also issued an injunction preventing Gruma Oceania from implementing any changes to employees' conditions until it had fulfilled its obligations under the Act. This decision reinforced the importance of adhering to the Fair Work Act's procedural requirements and the consequences of failing to do so.

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

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established