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

[2018] FWC 4159

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)

Monadelphous Engineering Pty Ltd

(B2018/588)

Deputy President Gostencnik

MELBOURNE, 13 JULY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Monadelphous Engineering 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 Monadelphous Engineering Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 13 July 2018 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 T Jackson 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 PR608995.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) took legal action against Monadelphous Engineering Pty Ltd, seeking a declaration that the union's proposed industrial action was protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute arose when the union intended to conduct a protected action ballot among its members, who were employees of Monadelphous. The company contested the validity of the ballot, arguing that the proposed action was not covered by the protections afforded by the Act.

The court was tasked with determining whether the proposed industrial action was genuinely for the purpose of a trade dispute and whether it complied with the procedural requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act. The key issue was whether the ballot, which sought to determine if employees would participate in a protected action, met the statutory criteria for protected action.

The court held that the proposed industrial action was indeed protected action under the Act, as it was intended to be used in a trade dispute. The court examined the content of the ballot paper, which clearly outlined the proposed action and its purpose. The ballot's procedural requirements were also met, as it was to be conducted in accordance with the union's rules and the provisions of the Fair Work Act. The court found that the ballot was valid and that the employees' right to engage in protected action was upheld.

The court granted the union's application for a declaration that the proposed industrial action was protected action. The company's challenge to the validity of the ballot was dismissed, and the union was permitted to proceed with the ballot as planned.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established