Wesfarmers Premier Coal Ltd v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union (No 2)

The case of Wesfarmers Premier Coal Ltd v Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union (No 2) involved Premier Coal, a coal mining company, and the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing & Kindred Industries Union (AMWU), which represented the maintenance workers at the Collie coal mine in Western Australia. The dispute centred around an industrial action taken by the union and its officers, specifically a strike in October, which Premier Coal claimed was unlawful. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the lawfulness of the strike and the implications of the actions taken by the union.

The central legal issues revolved around the interpretation of the provisions in the Fair Work Act 2009, particularly concerning the protection afforded to industrial action under certain conditions. Premier Coal argued that the strike was unlawful as it was taken over rostering arrangements, a matter that was not protected under the Act. The union contended that the strike was legitimate, relying on a proposed draft agreement that included certain terms which they believed provided sufficient protection. The court had to decide whether the union’s actions were lawful under the Act and whether the provisions in the proposed draft agreement provided adequate protection against the strike being deemed unlawful.

In its reasoning, the court found that the union and its officers had organised the strike to coerce Premier Coal into agreeing to terms that would not require the same rostering arrangements for mining operators and maintenance employees. The court concluded that the union had taken industrial action with the intent to coerce the employer, which was not permissible under the Act. The court issued a declaration that the AMWU (Cth), the AMWU-WA, and certain union officers had engaged in unlawful industrial action. The court indicated that while penalties may be considered, it would need to be persuaded to impose any in light of the circumstances of the strike and the nature of the proposed draft agreement.

The court ordered further directions to be set for 11 January 2005 to address the outstanding issues of damages and penalties, as well as any other relief that may be appropriate. The court expressed a preference for the parties to resolve the matter of compensatory damages amicably but was prepared to proceed with an assessment if necessary.