“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v QinetiQ Pty Ltd Summary

[2022] FWC 742

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

QinetiQ Pty Ltd

(B2022/264)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 4 APRIL 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of QinetiQ Pty Ltd.

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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of QinetiQ Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

On 4 April 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 Barry 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.

An order has been separately issued in PR739991.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission was asked to decide whether to allow the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), to conduct a ballot of employees of QinetiQ Pty Ltd. This application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The AMWU sought to conduct the ballot to organise the employees, who were potentially in a position to take protected action.

The primary legal issue before the Deputy President was whether the AMWU had met the requirements of section 437 of the Act to conduct a ballot for protected action. Specifically, the court had to determine if the AMWU had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with QinetiQ Pty Ltd, as mandated by section 443(1) of the Act. The AMWU had submitted a declaration by Mr Barry Terzic, outlining the steps taken in the bargaining process with QinetiQ Pty Ltd and asserting their genuine attempts to reach an agreement.

The Deputy President, Clancy, found that the AMWU had provided sufficient evidence of their genuine efforts to negotiate with QinetiQ Pty Ltd. The court was satisfied that there was a notification period for the proposed agreement and that the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act were met. Consequently, the Deputy President determined to issue an order for the AMWU to conduct the ballot without holding a hearing. This decision was made on the basis of the material presented, including Mr Terzic's declaration.

The final order was issued in PR739991, permitting the AMWU to proceed with the ballot as requested. This decision was rendered on 4 April 2022, in Melbourne, by Deputy President Clancy.

“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v QinetiQ Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established