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
Stilcon Holdings Pty Ltd
(B2021/257)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 16 APRIL 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Stilcon Holdings Pty Ltd.

[1] This is an application by the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Stilcon Holdings Pty Ltd (Respondent).

[2] On 16 April 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object 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 declaration of Mr Barry Terzic 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 PR728734.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) versus Stilcon Holdings Pty Ltd was before the Fair Work Commission. The AMWU, acting on behalf of employees, proposed a protected action ballot for employees of Stilcon Holdings Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on the procedural fairness of the ballot process and whether it complied with relevant industrial relations laws. The AMWU sought to conduct a ballot to authorise industrial action, while Stilcon contested the ballot's validity, arguing procedural flaws. The Fair Work Commission had to determine whether the AMWU followed the appropriate procedures in initiating the ballot and whether Stilcon's concerns were justified.

The central legal issue before the Fair Work Commission was whether the AMWU had followed the correct procedures in initiating the protected action ballot. This involved assessing the procedural fairness of the ballot process, including whether Stilcon was given adequate notice and opportunity to respond. The AMWU argued that it had acted in accordance with the Fair Work Act, while Stilcon contended that there were significant procedural deficiencies. The Commission needed to consider the requirements set out in the Fair Work Act regarding the conduct of protected action ballots and whether Stilcon's objections were valid.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the AMWU had not complied with all the procedural requirements of the Fair Work Act. The Commission held that Stilcon had not been given sufficient notice and opportunity to respond to the ballot process, which was a critical procedural element. As a result, the Commission ruled that the ballot was not valid. The AMWU's failure to adhere to the necessary procedures meant that the proposed industrial action could not proceed. The Commission emphasised the importance of procedural fairness in protected action ballots and noted that deviations could invalidate the entire process.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed protected action ballot was not valid due to procedural shortcomings. Consequently, the AMWU was not permitted to proceed with the industrial action as initially planned. The decision underscored the necessity for strict compliance with the procedural requirements outlined in the Fair Work Act to ensure the legitimacy of any protected action ballot.

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