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
PPK Mining Equipment Pty Ltd
(B2021/1063)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 8 NOVEMBER 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of PPK Mining Equipment Pty Ltd

[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 PPK Mining Equipment Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 5 November 2021, 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 Tim Ferguson of the Applicant declared on 3 November 2021, 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 PR735555.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) filed a case against PPK Mining Equipment Pty Ltd regarding the employees' proposed protected action ballot. The dispute arose out of the union's intention to hold a ballot amongst the employees of the company to determine whether they wished to engage in protected industrial action. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The union sought orders to facilitate the ballot and the company opposed the ballot on various grounds, including that the ballot was not in accordance with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the union had complied with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act for holding a protected action ballot. The court had to determine whether the union had provided the necessary information to the employees and the employer, and whether the ballot notice was appropriately drafted and served. The company argued that the union had failed to include certain mandatory information in the ballot notice, which rendered it invalid.

The court examined the statutory requirements for a protected action ballot and found that the union had substantially complied with the necessary procedures. The court held that the minor deficiencies in the ballot notice did not render the ballot invalid, as the purpose of the notice was adequately communicated to the employees and the employer. The court emphasised that the provisions of the Fair Work Act should be interpreted in a manner that promotes the objects of the Act, including the protection of employees' rights to engage in protected industrial action. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the union and ordered that the ballot proceed as planned.

The court's decision mandated that PPK Mining Equipment Pty Ltd facilitate the employees' proposed protected action ballot in accordance with the union's notice. The company was directed to provide the union with the necessary information and facilities to conduct the ballot, and to refrain from interfering with the employees' right to vote. The union was granted the relief it sought, enabling the employees to exercise their rights under the Fair Work Act.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v PPK Mining Equipment 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