Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Queensland Rail Transit Authority T/A Queensland Rail

[2023] FWC 1147

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
v

Queensland Rail Transit Authority T/A Queensland Rail

(B2023/426)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 16 MAY 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Queensland Rail Transit Authority

This is an application by the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Queensland Rail Transit Authority T/A Queensland Rail (Respondent).

On 9 May 2023, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent objected to the application, however, the parties were able to reach a consent position.

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

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of John Donaghy of the Applicant declared on 5 May 2023, 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.

An Order has been separately issued in PR761921.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (Applicant) applied to the Fair Work Commission under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for an order allowing a protected action ballot of employees of the Queensland Rail Transit Authority T/A Queensland Rail (Respondent). The Respondent initially objected to the application, but the parties subsequently reached a consent position. The matter was determined on the papers without a hearing. The Vice President was satisfied that the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act had been met, based on the material before the Commission, including a statutory declaration from John Donaghy of the Applicant stating that the union had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement with the Respondent.

The legal issue before the Vice President was whether the requirements for a protected action ballot were satisfied. This included whether the union had genuinely been attempting to reach an agreement with the Respondent and if the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met. The Vice President had to consider the statutory declaration of John Donaghy, the union's attempts to reach an agreement with the Respondent, and whether the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act had been fulfilled.

The Vice President found that the union had genuinely been attempting to reach an agreement with the Respondent, as evidenced by the statutory declaration. The Vice President was also satisfied that the notification time for the proposed agreement had been met, and the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act had been fulfilled. The Vice President determined that the matter should be resolved on the papers without a hearing, and an order was issued in PR761921.

The Fair Work Commission issued an order allowing the protected action ballot of employees of Queensland Rail Transit Authority T/A Queensland Rail, as the union had met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Vice President's decision was based on the material before the Commission, including the statutory declaration from the union, and the fact that the parties had reached a consent position. The order was issued in PR761921.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established