| [2020] FWC 471 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order
"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU)
v
Valmet Pty Ltd
(B2020/51)
| Deputy President Dean | SYDNEY, 30 JANUARY 2020 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Valmet Pty Ltd.
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 Valmet Pty Ltd (Respondent).
On 30 January 2020, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.
In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.
On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Raymund Shortill declared on 28 January 2020, 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.
An Order has been separately issued in PR716268.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR716267>
- AGLC
- "Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Valmet Pty Ltd [2020] FWC 471
- Case
- [2020] FWC 471
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Commission examined whether the proposed industrial action was protected action within the meaning of the Fair Work Act, which requires that the action be taken for a "protected action purpose." The Commission also considered whether the union had provided sufficient information to its members to enable them to make an informed decision about participating in the industrial action. Furthermore, the Commission assessed whether the proposed ballot met the procedural requirements outlined in the Act, such as the timing and content of the ballot notice. The employer argued that the proposed ballot was not necessary and was an attempt to exert undue pressure. The Commission found that the union had provided adequate information to its members and that the proposed ballot was necessary to protect the employees' interests in relation to the proposed changes to their working conditions. Consequently, the Commission authorised the union to conduct the ballot.
The Commission determined that the proposed ballot complied with the requirements under the Fair Work Act, and it granted authorisation for the AMWU to conduct the ballot among its members. The employer was directed to provide necessary assistance to facilitate the ballot process. The Commission's decision emphasised the importance of providing employees with sufficient information to make an informed decision about participating in industrial action and the need for unions to follow the procedural requirements when conducting a ballot. The Commission's authorisation of the ballot allowed the AMWU to proceed with the industrial action, subject to the outcome of the ballot.
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.