DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
v
Launch Housing Limited
(B2021/663)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 12 AUGUST 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Launch Housing Limited.

[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 Launch Housing Limited (Respondent).

[2] On 11 August 2021, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Ms Kristy Lee Tyrrell 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 PR732742.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union versus Launch Housing Limited, the Federal Court was tasked with determining whether an industrial action ballot proposed by the Union was protected under the Fair Work Act 2009. The dispute arose when Launch Housing Limited, an organisation involved in providing housing and related services, objected to a ballot initiated by the Union concerning potential protected industrial action by its employees. The Union sought a declaration that the ballot was protected, while Launch Housing Limited contested this, asserting that the ballot did not meet the legal criteria for protection.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the ballot complied with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Fair Work Act, and whether it was genuinely related to a workplace dispute. Specifically, the Court had to assess whether the ballot was properly conducted, if it pertained to a genuine workplace dispute, and if the Union had followed the necessary steps to ensure the ballot was protected under the Act. Additionally, the Court needed to consider the scope of the proposed industrial action and whether it was limited to matters within the Union's representational capacity.

In delivering the judgment, the Court determined that the ballot was procedurally sound and genuinely related to a workplace dispute. It was found that the Union had adhered to the requisite steps for conducting a protected action ballot. The Court held that the ballot was not only procedurally valid but also substantively connected to a legitimate workplace dispute. Consequently, the Court ruled in favour of the Union, declaring that the ballot was protected under the Fair Work Act. As a result of this ruling, the employees of Launch Housing Limited were able to proceed with the ballot as planned, within the confines of the protections afforded by the Act.

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Launch Housing Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established