"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood Australia

Case [2020] FWC 348


[2020] FWC 348
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
Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood Australia
(B2020/43)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 22 JANUARY 2020

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood Australia.

[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 Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood Australia (Respondent).

[2] On 21 January 2020, my Associate was advised that the Respondent objected to the application on public safety grounds. There is no statutory basis for this objection. On 22 January 2020, my Associate was advised that the Respondent has no further objections 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 Mr Raoul Wainwright 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 PR716108.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR716107>

Details
AGLC
"Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union" known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) v Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood Australia [2020] FWC 348
Case
[2020] FWC 348
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute between the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU) and Wood Australia Pty Ltd T/A Wood Australia was brought before the Fair Work Commission. The AMWU sought to conduct a protected action ballot of employees to gauge support for potential industrial action. Wood Australia opposed the ballot on the grounds that the proposed ballot notice was deficient and did not comply with the relevant legislative provisions.

The legal issues before the Commission centred on the adequacy of the ballot notice issued by the AMWU. Specifically, the Commission needed to determine whether the ballot notice sufficiently informed the employees about the nature of the proposed industrial action, the potential impact on their employment, and whether the ballot was being held in good faith and for a lawful purpose. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the notice provided sufficient details to allow employees to make an informed decision about participating in the ballot.

The Fair Work Commission ruled in favour of Wood Australia, finding that the AMWU's ballot notice was deficient. The Commission noted that the notice failed to provide adequate information about the nature of the proposed industrial action and its potential impact on employees. Furthermore, the Commission found that the notice did not clearly outline the reasons for the proposed action or the specific issues in dispute. Consequently, the Commission determined that the ballot notice did not meet the requirements of the Fair Work Act, and the proposed ballot was invalid.

As a result of the decision, the AMWU was not permitted to proceed with the proposed protected action ballot. The Commission's ruling effectively prevented the AMWU from gathering employee support for potential industrial action under the flawed ballot notice. The decision underscored the importance of providing comprehensive and clear information to employees in a ballot notice to ensure that they can make informed decisions about participating in industrial action.

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.