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)
v
MSF Sugar Pty Ltd
(B2020/305)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 11 JUNE 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of MSF Sugar Pty Ltd employed at the Maryborough Sugar Factory.

[1] 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 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of MSF Sugar Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 10 June 2020, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Edward Couch of the Applicant setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and are, 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.

[5] An Order has been separately issued in PR720136.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) brought proceedings against MSF Sugar Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The AMWU sought to hold a ballot of employees of MSF Sugar Pty Ltd employed at the Maryborough Sugar Factory, to determine whether they would support protected action. MSF Sugar Pty Ltd opposed the ballot, contending that it did not provide the information required by the relevant legislation to enable the AMWU to conduct a lawful ballot. The AMWU argued that it had provided sufficient information. The AMWU also argued that, even if the information provided was insufficient, the Court should exercise its discretion to permit the ballot to proceed.

The Commission considered whether the AMWU had provided sufficient information to permit the ballot to proceed. The AMWU had provided an outline of proposed action, including a total shutdown of the factory. The AMWU had also provided details of the employees who would be affected by the proposed action, along with their work locations and hours of work. However, the AMWU had not provided details of the specific work that employees would refuse to perform, nor had it provided details of when the proposed action would occur. The Commission held that the information provided was insufficient to permit the ballot to proceed. Nevertheless, the Commission exercised its discretion to permit the ballot to proceed on the basis that the deficiencies in the information provided were minor and unlikely to mislead the employees. The AMWU was permitted to hold a ballot of the employees of MSF Sugar Pty Ltd employed at the Maryborough Sugar Factory. The AMWU was ordered to pay MSF Sugar Pty Ltd's costs of the proceeding.

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

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established