Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers, The v Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd

Case [2014] FWC 1135


[2014] FWC 1135

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers, The
v
Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd
(B2014/26)

COMMISSIONER SIMPSON

BRISBANE, 14 FEBRUARY 2014

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd.

[1] This decision concerns an application made pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by the Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers. Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Port of Brisbane Pty ltd

[2] The Employer has advised that it does not oppose the application.

[3] In the circumstances I have decided to determine the matter on the papers as I am satisfied it is not necessary to hold a hearing.

[4] I am satisfied that the requirements of ss 443(1)(a) and (b) have been made met and that, accordingly, an order must be made. An order, PR547812, based on the draft provided by the Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers, will be issued at the same time as this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR547813>

Details
AGLC
Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers, The v Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd [2014] FWC 1135
Case
[2014] FWC 1135
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers brought proceedings against the Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd in the Fair Work Commission. The Institute sought an authorisation for its members, who were employees of the Port, to engage in protected action in response to an industrial dispute. The employees were seeking to conduct a ballot to determine whether they would support the proposed protected action, which was intended to pressure the employer into addressing their grievances. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining whether the proposed industrial action met the criteria for authorisation under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed protected action was in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Work Act and the relevant industrial instruments. The Commission had to consider whether the proposed action was a "protected action" as defined in the Act and whether it complied with the procedural requirements for authorisation. Additionally, the Commission needed to assess whether the action was related to a "workplace dispute" within the meaning of the Act and whether the employees had followed the necessary steps to seek a resolution through the appropriate industrial mechanisms before resorting to protected action.

In determining the matter, the Commission examined the evidence presented by both parties and considered the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act and associated regulations. The Commission found that the proposed action was indeed protected action as it involved a stoppage of work by employees. Furthermore, the Commission was satisfied that the action related to a genuine workplace dispute and that the employees had made a genuine attempt to resolve the dispute through the prescribed industrial processes. The Commission concluded that the proposed action met the criteria for authorisation under the Act, and therefore granted the authorisation for the employees to conduct a ballot to determine their support for the proposed action.

The Fair Work Commission authorised the Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers to conduct a ballot among its members employed by the Port of Brisbane Pty Ltd to determine their support for the proposed protected action. The Commission's decision was based on the findings that the proposed action was a protected action, related to a genuine workplace dispute, and that the employees had attempted to resolve the dispute through the appropriate industrial processes. The authorisation granted the employees the right to engage in the protected action if a majority of those balloted supported the action, subject to any further conditions imposed by 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.