DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU)
v
Kennametal Australia Pty Ltd
(B2017/567)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 6 JULY 2017

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

[2] On 6 July 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 statutory 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 PR594401.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute between the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, known as the AMWU, and Kennametal Australia Pty Ltd, was brought before the court. The AMWU sought to conduct a protected action ballot among employees of Kennametal Australia Pty Ltd, which was contested by the company. The court had to determine whether the AMWU was entitled to proceed with the ballot as proposed.

The legal issues centred on the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009, specifically regarding the procedural requirements for conducting a protected action ballot. The AMWU argued that the proposed ballot was within the bounds of the Act, while Kennametal Australia Pty Ltd contended that the ballot did not comply with the statutory requirements, particularly in relation to the timing and content of the ballot notice.

The court examined the provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 and found that the AMWU's proposed ballot did not comply with the requirements for timing and content as outlined in the legislation. The court held that the ballot notice must be given at least 14 days before the ballot is held, and that the notice must contain specific information as required by the Act. As the AMWU's proposed ballot did not adhere to these statutory requirements, the court ruled in favour of Kennametal Australia Pty Ltd.

Accordingly, the court issued an order prohibiting the AMWU from proceeding with the proposed ballot unless and until it complied with the statutory requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. This included giving the required notice with the necessary information at least 14 days before the ballot was to be held.

"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Kennametal Australia 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