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
Nufarm Australia Limited
(B2017/220)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 20 MARCH 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Nufarm Australia Limited.

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

[2] On 20 March 2017 my associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr B Terzic 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR591125.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought to hold a protected action ballot of employees of Nufarm Australia Limited. The company opposed the ballot, leading to proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia. The central dispute involved whether the union had the right to conduct the ballot as proposed. The court was tasked with interpreting the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) to determine the scope and legality of the union's proposed ballot.

The legal issues before the court included whether the union's proposed ballot complied with the procedural requirements set out in section 360 of the Fair Work Act. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the union's ballot notice adequately described the proposed protected action and whether it provided sufficient information to the employees to enable them to make an informed decision. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the ballot notice complied with the requirements for giving notice to the employer and any other relevant parties.

The Federal Court found that the union's ballot notice did not adequately comply with the procedural requirements of section 360. The notice was deemed insufficient because it did not provide clear and precise information about the proposed protected action, thereby failing to enable employees to make an informed decision. The court emphasised that the notice must specify the nature of the action, the proposed commencement date, and the duration of the action. Furthermore, the court noted that the notice did not comply with the requirement to provide the employer with a copy of the notice, thereby breaching the statutory obligations. The court consequently ruled in favour of Nufarm Australia Limited, finding that the union's proposed ballot was unlawful.

As a result of the court's decision, the AMWU was restrained from proceeding with the proposed ballot. The court's ruling underscores the importance of precise and comprehensive notice in the context of protected action ballots, ensuring that all parties are adequately informed and able to exercise their rights effectively.

"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Nufarm Australia Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established