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

[2017] FWC 1936

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

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)

McCormick Foods Australia Pty Ltd

(B2017/280)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 5 APRIL 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of McCormick Foods Australia.

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 McCormick Foods Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

On 5 April 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

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.

An order has been separately issued in PR591628.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case between the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) and McCormick Foods Australia Pty Ltd revolved around a proposed ballot of employees concerning protected action. The AMWU sought to conduct a ballot among McCormick Foods' employees to determine if they would support certain industrial action, such as a strike. McCormick Foods contested the ballot on various grounds, leading to a legal dispute that was heard in the Fair Work Commission.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the AMWU had the right to conduct the proposed ballot and if McCormick Foods' objections to the ballot were valid. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the ballot complied with the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly in relation to the timing, content, and purpose of the ballot. Additionally, the court considered whether McCormick Foods had valid grounds to oppose the ballot, including whether the proposed industrial action would result in unlawful conduct or if the ballot's content was misleading or deceptive.

The Fair Work Commission found in favour of the AMWU. It held that the ballot was properly conducted and complied with the statutory requirements. The Commission emphasised that the ballot's purpose was to ascertain employee support for potential industrial action, which is a lawful activity under the Act. The Commission dismissed McCormick Foods' objections, finding no evidence of unlawful conduct or misleading content in the ballot. Consequently, the proposed ballot was permitted to proceed.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that McCormick Foods allow the AMWU to conduct the proposed ballot among its employees. The Commission's decision reinforced the importance of ensuring that employees have the opportunity to express their views on potential industrial action within the legal framework provided by the Fair Work Act 2009.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established