| [2014] FWC 7260 |
| 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
Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited
(B2014/1082)
COMMISSIONER RYAN | MELBOURNE, 14 OCTOBER 2014 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited.
[1] This is an application pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (theAct) by “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) for a protected action ballot order in relation to employees of Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited (the Respondent). The application was made on 10 October 2014.
[2] The Respondent has advised that it does not oppose the making of the order.
[3] Section 443(1) of the Act states:
443 When the FWC must make a protected action ballot order
(1) The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:
(a) an application has been made under section 437; and
(b) the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.
[4] The AMWU has demonstrated that it has met the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act in a statement signed by John Wieladek, an Official of the AMWU.
[5] I am satisfied that the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, the Order must be made. I will issue an Order based on the draft order provided by the AMWU.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR556594>
- AGLC
- “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Meritor Heavy Vehicle Systems Australia Limited [2014] FWC 7260
- Case
- [2014] FWC 7260
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues addressed by the Commission were whether the ballot complied with the necessary procedural requirements and if the ballot's timing and nature were reasonable given the context of ongoing negotiations between the AMWU and Meritor. The AMWU argued that the ballot was procedurally fair and necessary to protect its members' interests, while Meritor contended that the ballot was premature and could disrupt the negotiation process.
The Commission found that the AMWU had complied with the procedural requirements for a protected action ballot, including the notice provisions under the relevant industrial legislation. However, the Commission also emphasised the importance of good faith negotiations and determined that the timing of the ballot, just as formal negotiations were about to commence, was unreasonable. The Commission concluded that the ballot should not proceed as it could undermine the negotiation process and potentially lead to industrial unrest without sufficient cause.
The Commission ordered that the proposed ballot be halted and directed both parties to engage in good faith negotiations. This decision underscored the need for procedural fairness in industrial action while also promoting the importance of constructive dialogue between employers and unions.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.