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

[2022] FWC 2414

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

Monroe Australia Ltd T/A Monroe

(B2022/1359)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 12 SEPTEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Monroe Australia Ltd T/A Monroe.

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 Monroe Australia Ltd T/A Monroe (Respondent).

On 12 September 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent 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 Stuart Gordon 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 PR745708.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) applied to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of Monroe Australia Ltd T/A Monroe. The AMWU sought to hold a ballot to authorise potential industrial action due to an impasse in enterprise bargaining negotiations. Monroe did not object to the application, leading the Deputy President to determine the matter based on the written submissions.

The key legal issue for the Deputy President was whether the AMWU had satisfied the prerequisites for a protected action ballot under the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the court needed to ascertain whether the AMWU had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with Monroe, as required by section 443(1) of the Act. The AMWU submitted a declaration by Mr Stuart Gordon, which outlined the union's efforts to negotiate in good faith. The Deputy President needed to assess the validity of the AMWU's claim that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement.

After reviewing the materials, including the declaration from Mr Gordon, the Deputy President concluded that the AMWU had genuinely tried to reach an agreement with Monroe. The AMWU's efforts in bargaining were deemed sufficient to satisfy the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act. Consequently, the Deputy President determined that the AMWU had met the conditions for holding a protected action ballot. An order was issued separately in PR745708, authorising the ballot.

The court's decision hinged on the AMWU's demonstration of genuine bargaining efforts and the absence of objections from Monroe. The Deputy President's ruling allowed the AMWU to proceed with the ballot, enabling the union to take necessary steps to seek resolution through potential industrial action if the ballot results permit. The order in PR745708 formalised this decision, providing the AMWU with the authority to conduct the ballot as planned.

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

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established