| [2022] FWC 2451 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action
Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch Inc T/A Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch (ADAVB)
v
Bass Coast Health
(B2022/1380)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY | MELBOURNE, 14 SEPTEMBER 2022 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Bass Coast Health
This is an application by the Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch Inc trading as Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch (ADAVB) (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Bass Coast Health (Respondent).
On 14 September 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Mr Matthew Hopcraft 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.
An order has been separately issued in PR745824.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR745823>
- AGLC
- Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch Inc T/A Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch (ADAVB) v Bass Coast Health [2022] FWC 2451
- Case
- [2022] FWC 2451
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues for the Deputy President to address were whether the notification period for the proposed agreement had been met and if the ADAVB had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with Bass Coast Health as required by section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act. The Deputy President's decision hinged on the declaration of Mr Matthew Hopcraft of the ADAVB, which outlined the bargaining steps taken and the association's efforts to reach an agreement with the Respondent. The Deputy President was satisfied that the notification period was met and that the ADAVB had genuinely tried to reach an agreement, fulfilling the statutory requirements.
Given the findings, the Deputy President concluded that the requirements for a protected action ballot were satisfied. An order was subsequently issued to allow the ballot to proceed, with the documentation detailing the steps taken and the genuine nature of the bargaining efforts. The Deputy President issued the order without further proceedings, considering the material before him sufficient to make a determination. The final orders reflect the decision to permit the ballot under the specified conditions.
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.