UGL Operations & Maintenance Pty Ltd v “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union (AMWU)

[2016] FWC 7200

[2016] FWC 7200

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.418—Industrial action

UGL Operations & Maintenance Pty Ltd
v
“Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU); Australian Workers’ Union, The
(C2016/5953)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOOLEY MELBOURNE, 7 OCTOBER 2016

Alleged industrial action at UGL Operations & Maintenance Pty Ltd at the Geelong site.

[1] UGL Operations & Maintenance Pty Ltd made an application seeking orders that its employees who failed to attend work or muster to attend work at the Viva Geelong Refinery site at Refinery Road Corio cease industrial action.

[2] The background to this matter is set out in my decision of today’s date in relation the application for orders against the AMWU and AWU and I do not repeat that background in this decision.

[3] At the hearing on 5 October 2016, I granted UGL’s application for an order for substituted service to enable notice of the application and time and date of hearing to be served on all employees of UGL rostered to work at the Viva Geelong Refinery.

[4] At the hearing, Mr Chris Gianatti gave evidence of service on the employees and I am satisfied that the employees were served in accordance with the order for substituted service.

[5] There was no appearance by the employees at the hearing. Representatives of the AMWU and AWU attended the hearing but they did not announce an appearance for the employees.

[6] At the hearing, Mr Gianatti advised that work had not been performed by UGL employees on the night shift and that not all UGL employees rostered to work had attended the muster point as directed, either last night or this morning. UGL therefore sought orders directed at those employees who had either not attended work or who had not attended the muster point. I was advised that none of the employees against whom orders were sought were on authorised leave.

[7] Mr Gianatti sought orders until 4 November 2016. This was two weeks after the scheduled maintenance shutdown was due to end. He submitted that due to the ongoing industrial action the scheduled shut down may need to be extended hence the date of the order.

[8] At the conclusion of the hearing I advised that I was satisfied that industrial action was occurring and that it was likely to continue. Having made those findings, an order was issued.

[9] I am satisfied that the period of the order is appropriate in all the circumstances as there is no evidence before the Commission of when this dispute is likely to be resolved.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR586197>