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
Sealed Air Pty Ltd
(B2018/937)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

SYDNEY, 15 OCTOBER 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Sealed Air 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 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Sealed Air Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 15 October 2018, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr N Grealy 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR701331.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) versus Sealed Air Pty Ltd was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The AMWU sought to conduct a ballot of employees to ascertain their support for protected industrial action, which was intended to be a strike. The dispute arose from disagreements over proposed changes to employment conditions, including alterations to shift patterns and the introduction of new employment terms. Sealed Air Pty Ltd opposed the ballot, arguing that it was premature and that the union had not provided adequate information to justify the proposed action.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the union had a genuine and arguable case for protected industrial action and whether the ballot was a necessary and proportionate means of determining employee support for such action. The Commission had to consider the requirements under the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly the provisions relating to the notification of industrial action and the process for conducting a ballot. It also needed to assess whether the union had followed the correct procedural steps and provided sufficient information to employees to enable them to make an informed decision.

The Fair Work Commission concluded that the union had a genuine and arguable case for protected industrial action, as the proposed changes to employment conditions were significant and adversely affected the employees' terms of employment. The Commission found that the union had provided adequate information to the employees to enable them to make an informed decision about the proposed action. Consequently, the Commission ordered that the ballot be conducted and that Sealed Air Pty Ltd facilitate the process as required by the Fair Work Act. The Commission further directed that the union and the employer comply with all procedural requirements to ensure the ballot was conducted fairly and in accordance with the law.

In summary, the Commission upheld the union's right to conduct a ballot for protected industrial action, finding that the proposed changes to employment conditions warranted such action and that the union had followed the necessary procedures. The employer was directed to facilitate the ballot process, and both parties were reminded of their obligations under the Fair Work Act.

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