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
Thales Australia Limited
(B2019/1273)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

SYDNEY, 5 NOVEMBER 2019

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Thales Australia Limited.

[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 for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Thales Australia Limited (Respondent).

[2] On 5 November 2019, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose 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 Robyn Fortescue of the AMWU declared on 4 November 2019, setting out the steps taken by them in bargaining with the Respondent and that they have been, and are, 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 PR714011.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union, acting on behalf of employees of Thales Australia Limited, sought to conduct a protected action ballot among its members. Thales Australia Limited opposed the ballot, resulting in a dispute that was brought before the Fair Work Commission. The central issue before the Commission was whether the proposed industrial action constituted a "protected action" under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), thereby qualifying for the protections afforded by the legislation. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine whether the proposed action was in relation to a "workplace matter" and if it was an action in pursuit of an industrial claim or object.

The Fair Work Commission examined the definition of "protected action" and considered the nature of the proposed action. The Commission noted that the proposed action was related to the employees' terms and conditions of employment, which qualified as a workplace matter. The Commission also found that the action was in pursuit of an industrial claim, as it related to the employees' desire for better terms and conditions. Consequently, the Commission determined that the proposed action was indeed protected action, and Thales Australia Limited's opposition to the ballot was unlawful. The Commission ordered Thales Australia Limited to facilitate the ballot process as requested by the AMWU.

The Fair Work Commission issued orders mandating Thales Australia Limited to provide the AMWU with the necessary resources and information to conduct the ballot, including access to the company's employee records. Thales Australia Limited was also directed to refrain from interfering with the AMWU's activities related to the ballot. The AMWU was granted permission to proceed with the protected action ballot as planned.

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

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established