“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd T/A Cadbury, Claremont

[2023] FWC 1020

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

Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd T/A Cadbury, Claremont

(B2023/389)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 1 MAY 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd

This is an application by the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd (Respondent).

On 1 May 2023, during a telephone mention, the Respondent advised that they did not object to the application.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Mr John Short 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 PR761506.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission dealt with an application by the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) against Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Cadbury, Claremont. The AMWU sought a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of Mondelez. Mondelez did not object to the application during a telephone mention on 1 May 2023. Consequently, the Deputy President, Clancy, decided to determine the matter based on the submitted documents without a hearing. The AMWU provided a declaration by Mr John Short, affirming their genuine efforts in bargaining with Mondelez and the existence of a notification time for the proposed agreement. These submissions satisfied the requirements under section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue the Deputy President had to decide was whether the AMWU met the criteria for a protected action ballot under section 437 of the Fair Work Act. This involved assessing whether the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with Mondelez and if the notification time for the proposed agreement was appropriately established. Given the documentation provided, including the declaration by Mr Short, the Deputy President found that the AMWU had satisfied these requirements.

In issuing the order, Deputy President Clancy noted the AMWU's assertion of genuine bargaining efforts and the establishment of the notification time as per the Fair Work Act. The Deputy President was satisfied with the evidence presented and determined that the AMWU had fulfilled the necessary conditions for the protected action ballot. Consequently, the application for the ballot order was approved.

The Fair Work Commission issued an order permitting the AMWU to proceed with the protected action ballot among the specified employees of Mondelez Australia Pty Ltd. This decision was recorded in PR761506, marking the formal approval of the union's application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established