Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch v Darebin Community Health Service T/A Your Community Health

[2018] FWC 4163

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch

Darebin Community Health Service T/A Your Community Health

(B2018/594)

Vice President Catanzariti

SYDNEY, 13 JULY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Your Community Health.

This is an application by Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Darebin Community Health Service T/A Your Community Health (Respondent).

On 12 July 2018, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent does not oppose the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Ms A Leonard 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 PR609004.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch brought an action against Darebin Community Health Service, trading as Your Community Health, in relation to a proposed industrial action ballot of employees. The dispute involved whether the association had standing to bring the action and whether the proposed ballot was lawful. The Fair Work Commission heard the matter, where it was necessary to determine whether the association was an appropriate body to bring the action and if the proposed industrial action was protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The court examined whether the association was an appropriate body to bring the action and had standing to do so. The association argued that it was an appropriate body as it was a registered organisation and had a genuine interest in the dispute. The court considered whether the association's members were directly affected by the proposed ballot and if the association had a legitimate interest in the outcome of the dispute. The court also assessed whether the proposed industrial action was protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The court found that the association had standing to bring the action as it was an appropriate body with a genuine interest in the dispute. The court also found that the proposed industrial action was protected action, as it related to the employees' terms and conditions of employment. However, the court found that the proposed ballot was not a lawful protected action as it did not comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The court found that the proposed ballot was not a lawful protected action as it did not provide the required information to the employees and did not comply with the notice requirements.

The court ordered that the proposed ballot be stopped and that the association take all necessary steps to ensure that the employees were provided with the required information. The court also ordered that the association and the health service take all necessary steps to ensure that any future protected action complied with the Fair Work Act 2009.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established