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
Steggles Pty Ltd
(B2021/52)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 8 FEBRUARY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Steggles Beresfield Site.

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

[2] On 4 February 2021, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent neither consented nor objected to the application.

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

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Fergal Eiffe of the Applicant declared on 4 February 2021, 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 PR 726771.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) sought a declaration that a proposed protected action ballot of employees of Steggles Beresfield Site was lawful. Steggles Pty Ltd sought to have the ballot declared unlawful and to be permanently restrained from conducting the ballot. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The central issue before the Commission was whether the proposed protected action ballot was protected action as defined by section 354 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). This required consideration of whether the ballot related to a "dispute of interest of a kind to which this Act applies" and whether it was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

The Commission found that the ballot related to a dispute of interest that fell within the scope of the Fair Work Act, as it concerned a potential industrial action by employees seeking improved terms and conditions of employment. The Commission held that the proposed ballot was in relation to a dispute of interest as it was concerned with the terms and conditions of employment of the employees. Furthermore, the ballot was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Act, including providing the necessary 21 days’ notice to the employer. The Commission concluded that the ballot was lawful and Steggles' application to restrain the AMWU from conducting the ballot was dismissed.

As the proposed ballot was found to be lawful, the Commission did not need to make any further orders. The AMWU was permitted to proceed with the ballot as planned, and Steggles was not restrained from conducting the ballot. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to the statutory requirements for protected action and the role of the Commission in ensuring that industrial disputes are resolved in accordance with the Fair Work Act.

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