DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch
v
Latrobe Community Health Service Ltd T/A Latrobe Community Health Service
(B2018/602)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 31 JULY 2018

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Latrobe Community Health Service Ltd T/A Latrobe Community Health Service.

[1] 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 Latrobe Community Health Service Ltd T/A Latrobe Community Health Service (Respondent).

[2] On 27 July 2018, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent does not oppose the application.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Aleysia 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.

[5] An order has been separately issued in PR609544.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, the Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch (ADAVB) challenged a proposed protected action ballot of employees of Latrobe Community Health Service Ltd T/A Latrobe Community Health Service. The employees, represented by the ADAVB, sought to conduct a strike ballot to explore their ability to take industrial action due to dissatisfaction with their employment terms and conditions. The Latrobe Community Health Service argued that the ballot was unlawful as it did not comply with the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed ballot complied with the provisions of section 397 of the Fair Work Act, which outlines the requirements for a lawful industrial action ballot. Specifically, the Commission had to determine whether the ballot notice was in the approved form, provided sufficient information to employees about the proposed industrial action, and was given to employees within the appropriate timeframe. Another aspect was whether the ballot could proceed given that a good faith bargaining obligation was in place.

The Commission found that the proposed ballot complied with the statutory requirements. The ballot notice was in the approved form, contained sufficient information about the proposed industrial action, and was provided to employees within the prescribed timeframe. The Commission also determined that the good faith bargaining obligation did not preclude the employees from conducting the ballot. Consequently, the Commission authorised the proposed ballot, allowing the employees to proceed with the industrial action ballot as intended.

Australian Dental Association Victorian Branch v Latrobe Community Health Service Ltd T/A Latrobe Community Health Service

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established