Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Brimbank City Council

[2022] FWC 403

[2022] FWC 403

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
v

Brimbank City Council

(B2022/107)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT YOUNG MELBOURNE, 25 FEBRUARY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Brimbank City Council.

1. This is an application by the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Brimbank City Council (Respondent).

1. On 24 February 2022, the Fair Work Commission (Commission) was advised that the Respondent objected to the application, specifically ballot questions 8, 23 and 44. The matter was listed for Conference before me at 3.00pm on 25 February 2022. At Conference the Respondent withdrew its objection to ballot questions 23 and 44.

1. In relation the Respondent’s objection to ballot question 8, in order to address the Respondent’s concerns the Applicant proposed the insertion of additional words at the conclusion of the question, such that ballot question 8 would read as follows:

“8. An indefinite or periodic ban on the picking up of garbage in any Council reserve or roadside reserve unless it is an unacceptable safety risk that cannot be mitigated by Council.”

1. The Respondent agreed that the proposed amendment to ballot question 8 addressed its concerns with the proposed protected industrial action and on that basis no longer objected to the application.

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

1. On the basis of the material before me, including the declaration of Ms Cindy O’Connor 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.

1. The Applicant sought that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission be the ballot agent for the protected action ballot. This course was not opposed by the Respondent. The person proposed in the application as the protected action ballot agent is TrueVote Pty Ltd (TrueVote). I am satisfied that TrueVote is a fit and proper person to conduct the ballot. I am also satisfied that TrueVote is capable of ensuring the secrecy and security of the votes and of conducting the ballot expeditiously. TrueVote has agreed to be the protected action ballot agent and is bound to comply with the Privacy Act 1998 with respect to the handling of the information relating to the protected action ballot.

1. Therefore I appoint TrueVote as the protected action ballot agent.

1. An order has been separately issued in PR738754.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

<PR738755>