"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Quant Australia Pty Ltd Fosters Site T/A Quant Australia Pty Ltd

Case [2015] FWC 7616


[2015] FWC 7616
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.448 - Application for revocation of protected action ballot order

"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU)
v
Quant Australia Pty Ltd - Fosters Site T/A Quant Australia Pty Ltd
(B2015/1500)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

SYDNEY, 5 NOVEMBER 2015

Application to revoke order made in B2015/1375.

[1] Pursuant to s.448 of the Fair Work Act 2009 and upon the application by the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU), the Order of the Fair Work Commission dated 19 October 2015 [PR573026] is hereby revoked.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR573645>

Details
AGLC
"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Quant Australia Pty Ltd Fosters Site T/A Quant Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FWC 7616
Case
[2015] FWC 7616
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU), on behalf of its members employed by Quant Australia Pty Ltd at the Fosters Site, made an application to the Fair Work Commission to revoke an order made in an earlier matter. The dispute centred around the terms and conditions of employment of the union members and the alleged unfair labour practices by the employer. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the AMWU's application to revoke the earlier order should be granted.

The key legal issues before the Fair Work Commission involved the interpretation and application of the Fair Work Act 2009. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the AMWU had provided sufficient grounds to warrant the revocation of the earlier order, and whether such revocation would be in the interests of justice and fairness. Additionally, the Commission needed to assess the impact of any potential revocation on the rights and obligations of both the union and the employer.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission meticulously examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The Commission found that the AMWU had not adequately demonstrated that the circumstances had materially changed since the making of the earlier order to justify its revocation. The Commission concluded that maintaining the existing order was in the best interest of the union members and the employer, as it provided stability and certainty in the workplace relations. Consequently, the application to revoke the order was dismissed.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the earlier order remain in effect, and no further application to revoke it would be entertained without exceptional circumstances. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining a stable and fair industrial relations environment, and that any changes to existing orders should be supported by compelling evidence of changed circumstances.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.