Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Northern Territory of Australia

Case [2025] FWC 2200


[2025] FWC 2200

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia
v

Northern Territory of Australia

(B2025/1186)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMPTON

ADELAIDE, 29 JULY 2025

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Northern Territory of Australia.

  1. This is an application by the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA or Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of the Northern Territory of Australia (NT or Employer).

  1. APESMA is seeking that a ballot be conducted of members in its pharmacy division who are employed by the NT, including Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians, across the Northern Territory.

  1. On 29 July 2025, the Commission was advised that the Employer did not oppose the making of the application but sought that an extended notice period be ordered in relation to the proposed industrial action set out in clause 5 of the Order. APESMA did not consent to the extended notice period.

  1. In the circumstances, I have today held a hearing to determine the matter. During the course of the hearing, the parties advised that a consent position had been reached on the period of notice. Having explored the basis for that agreed position, I have granted leave to amend the application to reflect that position and now issued the proposed order.

  1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Jessica Hensman, Lead Organiser, setting out the steps taken by the APESMA in bargaining with the Employer and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the NT, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that all of the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

  1. The ballot is to be conducted by Fair Vote Services Pty Ltd (Fair Vote). Fair Vote has been approved as an eligible protected action ballot agent under s.468A of the Act and consequently is authorised to conduct the ballot.

  1. For the purposes of s.443(3)(c) of the Act, the Commission has determined that the date by which voting is to close is 13 August 2025.[1] This also establishes the ballot period for the purpose of s.448A(2) of the Act.

  1. I am satisfied that there are relevant exceptional circumstances required by s.443(5), justifying an extended minimum period of written notice for the purposes of s.414(2)(b) of the Act when taking industrial action set out in the Order made by the Commission. The extended written notice period of seven (7) calendar days applies to the items 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24 and 28 listed within Clause 5 of the Order.

  1. An Order has been separately issued in PR790114.

  1. This matter will be assigned to another Member of the Commission to conduct the s.448A compulsory conciliation conference. That Member will issue an Order requiring the attendance of all bargaining representatives in the proposed enterprise agreement at the conference. It is likely that Directions will also be issued to ensure that the parties attend the conference ready to conduct meaningful negotiations.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Appearances:

S Crawford with J Hensman, M Scott and M James for the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia.

B Jackson with H Glew, G Walsh, I Larard, A Brannelly and D Doherty for the Northern Territory of Australia.

Hearing details:

2025
MS Teams Video
July 29.

<PR790115>


[1] This is, in effect, 10 working days from the making of the Order and was the period discussed with the parties during the hearing of this matter.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Details
AGLC
Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Northern Territory of Australia [2025] FWC 2200
Case
[2025] FWC 2200
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission recently heard an application by the Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of the Northern Territory of Australia (NT). APESMA sought a ballot of members in its pharmacy division employed by the NT, including Pharmacists and Pharmacy Technicians. The NT did not oppose the application but sought an extended notice period for the proposed industrial action. APESMA did not consent to the extended notice period.

The key legal issue before the Commission was whether the requirements under section 443 of the Fair Work Act 2009 had been met for APESMA to hold the proposed protected action ballot. This included whether there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that APESMA had been genuinely trying to reach agreement with the NT. The Commission also had to determine if there were relevant exceptional circumstances to justify an extended minimum period of written notice for the industrial action.

The Commission found that APESMA had met all the requirements under section 443 of the Act for holding the protected action ballot. It was satisfied that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that APESMA had been genuinely trying to reach agreement with the NT. The Commission also determined that there were relevant exceptional circumstances justifying an extended minimum written notice period of seven calendar days for certain industrial action items. An Order was made granting the application for the protected action ballot and setting the closing date for voting as 13 August 2025. A separate Order was made for a compulsory conciliation conference to be conducted by another Member of the Commission.

In summary, the Commission granted APESMA's application for a protected action ballot order, but ordered an extended notice period of seven days for certain industrial action items. The matter will now proceed to a compulsory conciliation conference to be conducted by another Member of the Commission.

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.