"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Ridders Fresh Pty Ltd T/A Tibaldi Smallgoods
Case
•
[2013] FWC 1250
•27 FEBRUARY 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Ridders Fresh Pty Ltd T/A Tibaldi Smallgoods [2013] FWC 1250
[2013] FWC 1250
27 FEBRUARY 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, also known as the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union, sought to have a series of bargaining orders made against Ridders Fresh Pty Ltd trading as Tibaldi Smallgoods. The application was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The dispute arose when the union claimed that the company had engaged in unlawful conduct by failing to bargain in good faith with the union and by unilaterally altering the terms and conditions of employment of its employees. The union sought various orders that would compel the company to engage in good faith bargaining and to reinstate certain terms and conditions of employment.
The legal issues before the Commission included whether the union had established that the company had engaged in conduct that breached the Fair Work Act 2009, and if so, what orders should be made to remedy the situation. The company argued that it had not engaged in any unlawful conduct and that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to support its claims. The Commission needed to determine whether the evidence presented by the union was sufficient to establish the alleged breaches and, if so, what orders were appropriate to remedy the situation.
The Fair Work Commission found that the company had engaged in unlawful conduct by failing to engage in good faith bargaining and by unilaterally altering the terms and conditions of employment of its employees. The Commission noted that the union had provided sufficient evidence to establish these breaches. As a result, the Commission made several orders, including an order that the company must engage in good faith bargaining with the union and that the company must reinstate certain terms and conditions of employment. The Commission also made orders that the company pay compensation to affected employees and that it publish a notice of the orders on its website.
In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission found in favour of the union and made several orders against the company to remedy the situation. The Commission found that the company had engaged in unlawful conduct by failing to engage in good faith bargaining and by unilaterally altering the terms and conditions of employment of its employees. The orders made by the Commission included an order that the company must engage in good faith bargaining with the union, that it must reinstate certain terms and conditions of employment, that it must pay compensation to affected employees, and that it must publish a notice of the orders on its website.
The legal issues before the Commission included whether the union had established that the company had engaged in conduct that breached the Fair Work Act 2009, and if so, what orders should be made to remedy the situation. The company argued that it had not engaged in any unlawful conduct and that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to support its claims. The Commission needed to determine whether the evidence presented by the union was sufficient to establish the alleged breaches and, if so, what orders were appropriate to remedy the situation.
The Fair Work Commission found that the company had engaged in unlawful conduct by failing to engage in good faith bargaining and by unilaterally altering the terms and conditions of employment of its employees. The Commission noted that the union had provided sufficient evidence to establish these breaches. As a result, the Commission made several orders, including an order that the company must engage in good faith bargaining with the union and that the company must reinstate certain terms and conditions of employment. The Commission also made orders that the company pay compensation to affected employees and that it publish a notice of the orders on its website.
In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission found in favour of the union and made several orders against the company to remedy the situation. The Commission found that the company had engaged in unlawful conduct by failing to engage in good faith bargaining and by unilaterally altering the terms and conditions of employment of its employees. The orders made by the Commission included an order that the company must engage in good faith bargaining with the union, that it must reinstate certain terms and conditions of employment, that it must pay compensation to affected employees, and that it must publish a notice of the orders on its website.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Collective Bargaining
-
Bargaining Orders
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Flight Attendants’ Association of Australia [2021] FWC 6537
Cases Citing This Decision
8
Flight Attendants’ Association of Australia
[2021] FWC 6537
United Voice
[2017] FWC 1527
Cases Cited
1
Statutory Material Cited
0
National Union of Workers v Defries Industries Pty Ltd
[2009] FWA 88
National Union of Workers v Defries Industries Pty Ltd
[2009] FWA 88