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

Case [2015] FWC 1849


[2015] FWC 1849
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
Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd
(B2015/51)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT KOVACIC

MELBOURNE, 18 MARCH 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Schweppes Australia 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) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent).

[2] The AMWU has provided a Statutory Declaration addressing the statutory grounds. That Statutory Declaration makes it clear that the parties have met on approximately four occasions since 3 December 2014 in an effort to negotiate the terms of an enterprise agreement and, whilst progress has been made, the parties are unable to reach agreement.

[3] On 18 March 2015 I was advised by Ms Kelly Pinsent, Employee Relations Consultant - Support Team, that the Respondent does not intend to oppose the application. In doing so, the Respondent did not challenge that the AMWU had been and was genuinely trying to reach agreement in respect of either site.

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

[5] On the basis of the material before me, I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met. Accordingly, I will make an order. The order [PR562124] is based on the draft order provided by the AMWU and will be issued in conjunction with this decision.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR562123>

Details
AGLC
“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FWC 1849
Case
[2015] FWC 1849
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) brought proceedings against Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd, contesting the company's decision to deny the union access to its premises for the purpose of conducting a ballot of its employees on proposed protected industrial action. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission (FWC), which was tasked with determining whether the union had a right to access the premises for this purpose under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issue before the FWC was whether the union's right to access the premises for the ballot was restricted by the employer's legitimate business operations. The employer argued that granting the union access would disrupt its business operations, particularly in a high-security manufacturing environment. The union contended that its right to organise and conduct a ballot was protected under the Act and should not be unreasonably impeded by the employer's operational concerns.

The FWC held that the employer's legitimate business operations did not entirely preclude the union's right to access the premises for the ballot. The Commission found that the union had demonstrated a significant interest in conducting the ballot and that the employer had not provided sufficient evidence to justify a complete denial of access. The FWC ordered the employer to allow the union to conduct the ballot on its premises, subject to certain conditions designed to minimise disruption to the employer's operations.

The Fair Work Commission ordered Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd to permit the AMWU to conduct the ballot on its premises. The conditions attached to this order aimed to balance the union's right to organise with the employer's need to maintain business continuity. The employer was directed to provide necessary logistical support and to ensure that the ballot process was conducted in a manner that would cause minimal disruption to its operations.

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.