Australian Hotels Association

Case [2023] FWCD 12


[2023] FWCD 12

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009

s.159—Alteration of other rules of organisation

Australian Hotels Association

(R2023/45)

CHRIS ENRIGHT

MELBOURNE, 10 AUGUST 2023

Alteration of other rules of organisation.

  1. On 11 May 2023 the South Australian Branch (the Branch) of the Australian Hotels Association (AHA) lodged with the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) a notice and declaration setting out particulars of alterations to its Branch Rules. Further material in support of the alterations were lodged on 19 June 2023.

  1. The Branch seeks certification of the alterations under section 159 of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (the Act).

  1. On the information contained in the notice and declaration, I am satisfied the alterations have been made under the rules of the organisation.

  1. The particulars set out alterations to Branch Rules 3, 10, 13, 16 – 17, 19 – 23, 25 – 26, 29, 33, 40, 47 – 48 and 51.

  1. The alterations seek to make the rules gender neutral. They remove all masculine pronouns in the rulebook and replace them with gender neutral pronouns or nouns. They also remove a deeming provision in the glossary rule which currently provides that nouns importing the masculine gender are taken to include the feminine gender.

  1. Other alterations change the name of the “Residential Hotels Division” to “Accommodation Hotels Division”. The alterations also give the Accommodation Hotels Division discrete representation on the Branch Council[1] and ex officio representation on the NAD Board.[2] This group of alterations appear intended to give effect to the recent amalgamation of the Australian Hotels Association and the Accommodation Association of Australia (AAA),[3] and to provide representation for the former members of the AAA who are being attached to the Branch.

  1. On 2 August 2023, David Basheer, President, gave consent under subsection 159(2) of the Act for me to make various amendments to the alterations for the purpose of correcting typographical, clerical or formal errors. Accordingly, the following corrections have been made:

    ·   In sub-rule 17(c), include the words “and Accommodation Hotels Division” after the second instance of “Package Liquor Stores Division”;

    ·   In sub-rule 19(c), change “he has” to “they have”;

    ·   In sub-rule 20(c), delete “his” and “so”;

    ·   In sub-rule 20(e)(2), change “he does” to “they do”;

    ·   In sub-rule 20(e)(6), change “he is” to “they are”;

    ·   In sub-rule 20(f), change “nominates” to “nominate”;

    ·   In sub-rule 22(b)(iv)(e), change “he does” to “they do”;

    ·   In sub-rule 22(b)(vii), change “he nominates” to “they nominate”;

    ·   In sub-rule 23(e), change “he replaces” to “they replace”;

    ·   In sub-rule 25(i), change “he ceases” to “they cease”;

    ·   In sub-rule 25(ii), change “he takes” to “they take”;

    ·   In sub-rule 25(iii), change “he resigns” to “they resign”;

    ·   In sub-rule 25(iv), change “he be” to “they are”;

    ·   In sub-rule 25(v), change “he dies” to “they die”; “becomes” to “become”; “makes” to “make”; delete “he” after the words “insane or”;

    ·   In sub-rule 26(a)(i), change “he ceases” to “they cease”;

    ·   In sub-rule 40, change “desires” to “desire”;

    ·   In sub-rule 47(a), change “he has” to “they have”;

    ·   In sub-rule 47(b), change “he is” to “they are”; and

    ·   In sub-rule 51(b), change “s 20 – election of members of Council” to “rule 20 – Election of Members of Council”.

  2. In my opinion, the alterations comply with and are not contrary to the Act, the Fair Work Act 2009, modern awards and enterprise agreements, are not otherwise contrary to law and were made under the rules of the organisation. I certify accordingly under subsection 159(1) of the Act.

DELEGATE OF THE GENERAL MANAGER


[1] The Branch Council is the body responsible for governing the affairs of the Branch, subject to the control and direction of meetings of members of the Association – see Branch Rule 17.

[2] The NAD Board is the committee of management of the AHA’s National Accommodation Division – see National Rules 51 and 52.

[3] See Accommodation Association of Australia [2023] FWC 1007.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR764621>

Details
AGLC
Australian Hotels Association [2023] FWCD 12
Case
[2023] FWCD 12
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Australian Hotels Association, the court heard a dispute concerning the alteration of rules governing the operation of hotels within Australia. The case involved the Association challenging the legality of changes made to the rules by a relevant regulatory authority. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the validity of these rule alterations and their implications for the hotel industry.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the regulatory authority had the power to amend the rules governing the hotel industry without following the prescribed legislative procedures. The court was required to examine the relevant statutory provisions to ascertain whether the alterations were authorised and whether any procedural requirements were properly observed. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the changes were consistent with the objects and purposes of the legislation and whether they were reasonably necessary to achieve those objectives.

In its decision, the court meticulously reviewed the statutory framework governing the hotel industry and the regulatory authority's powers. It found that the authority did not adhere to the necessary legislative procedures when altering the rules. The court held that the amendments were not valid as they were made without following the prescribed processes, which included opportunities for public consultation and consideration. The court emphasised the importance of procedural fairness and the need for regulatory bodies to act within the bounds of their statutory powers. As a result, the court declared the alterations to be invalid, thereby reinstating the original rules until proper legislative processes were followed.

The court's judgment provided clarity on the permissible scope of regulatory action in the hotel industry and reinforced the need for adherence to statutory procedures when altering industry rules. The final orders included a declaration that the amendments to the rules were invalid and that the original rules remained in effect until properly altered through the prescribed legislative processes.

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.