Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union

[2011] FWA 7781

[2011] FWA 7781

FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
(B2011/3878)

Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union

(B2011/289

v
Queensland Rail

COMMISSIONER ASBURY BRISBANE, 10 NOVEMBER 2011

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Queensland Rail Limited.

[1] On 4 November 2011, the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (ASU) applied under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for protected action ballot Orders. On 7 November 2011, the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (RTBU) made an application under s.437 of the Act in substantially similar terms to the application filed by the ASU (collectively referred to hereinafter as the Unions).

[2] The applications sought Orders in relation to employees of Queensland Rail Limited (QR).

[3] Directions were issued on 4 November 2011 requiring QR to provide a response in writing by 12.00 pm on Monday 7 November 2011, advising whether there was an objection to the Orders in the terms sought, and whether it was seeking to have its objections heard by Fair Work Australia. The Unions were directed to file an outline of submissions and statements of evidence from any witnesses in support of the application by 4.00 pm on Monday 7 November 2011. QR was directed to file an outline of submissions and statements of evidence from any witnesses by 12.00 pm on Tuesday 8 November 2011, in the event it elected to object to the making of the Orders.

[4] The Directions also indicated that if there was an objection to the Order being made, the matter would be heard at 4.00pm on Tuesday 8 November 2011 and if there was no objection the application would be determined on the basis of material on the files.

[5] The Unions filed their material in line with the Directions. The material included submissions and statements from the following persons:

● James William Mattner, Senior Industrial Officer, ASU
● Peter James Allen, Principal Industrial Officer, RTBU

[6] QR forwarded correspondence on 7 November 2011 stating that it did not object to the Orders being sought by the ASU, and would not seek to have an objection heard. QR forwarded further correspondence on 8 November 2011 stating that it did not object to the Orders being sought by the RTBU, and would not seek to have an objection heard.

[7] In the circumstances I have decided to determine the matter on the basis of the material on the files as I am satisfied it is not necessary to hold a hearing. I am satisfied, on the basis of the submissions and statements filed by the Unions, that the relevant requirements of s.443 and s.437 of the Act have been met. Accordingly, pursuant to s.437, the Orders must be made. Orders based on the drafts provided by the Unions will issue with this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR516623>