The Australian Workers' Union v APT Am Employment Pty Ltd T/A APA Group Summary

[2023] FWC 840

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

The Australian Workers' Union
v

APT AM Employment Pty Ltd T/A APA Group

(B2023/315)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 5 APRIL 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of APT AM Employment Pty Ltd T/A APA Group

This is an application by the Australian Workers' Union (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 APT AM Employment Pty Ltd T/A APA Group (Respondent).

On 5 April 2023, 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 Terry William McQuillan of the Applicant declared on 3 April 2023, 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.

An Order has been separately issued in PR760933.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Workers' Union applied to the Fair Work Commission under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot order concerning certain employees of APT AM Employment Pty Ltd T/A APA Group. The application was made on the basis that the union had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer, but had been unable to do so. The employer did not oppose the application, leading the Commission to decide the matter on the papers without the need for a hearing.

The legal issues before the Fair Work Commission involved determining whether the union had genuinely been attempting to reach an agreement with the employer, and if the statutory requirements for a protected action ballot had been satisfied. Specifically, the Commission had to consider whether the union had provided sufficient evidence of its good faith bargaining efforts and whether the notification period specified in the Fair Work Act had been met.

The Fair Work Commission found that the union had indeed provided evidence of its genuine bargaining efforts through the statutory declaration of Terry William McQuillan. The Commission was satisfied that the union had met the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act, including the notification time for the proposed agreement. Consequently, the Commission decided to grant the application for a protected action ballot order.

The Fair Work Commission issued an order for a protected action ballot, allowing the Australian Workers' Union to proceed with the ballot to seek authorisation from its members for protected industrial action. The order was issued separately in PR760933.

The Australian Workers' Union v APT Am Employment Pty Ltd T/A APA Group

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established