| [2021] FWC 5955 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action
Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
v
Southern Midlands Council
(B2021/892)
DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY | MELBOURNE, 20 SEPTEMBER 2021 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Southern Midlands 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 Southern Midlands Council (Respondent).
[2] On 20 September 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 Samantha Batchelor 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 PR734117.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR734116>
- AGLC
- Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Southern Midlands Council [2021] FWC 5955
- Case
- [2021] FWC 5955
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Commission were whether the proposed industrial action was protected action under the Fair Work Act, and whether the Council had acted in accordance with the good faith bargaining obligations. The Commission needed to assess the legitimacy of the employees' concerns, the appropriateness of the proposed action, and whether the Council had adequately engaged in negotiations with the Union. Additionally, the Commission had to consider whether the Council's decision to implement the changes without reaching an agreement with the Union was justified.
In its decision, the Commission found that the proposed industrial action was protected action and that the Union had acted in good faith in seeking to protect its members' interests. The Commission concluded that the Council had not engaged in good faith bargaining and had acted in a manner that was likely to undermine the employees' rights. The Commission further determined that the Council's decision to implement the changes without reaching an agreement was not in accordance with the principles of good faith bargaining. As a result, the Commission ruled that the ballot was lawful and that the Council must return to the negotiating table to reach a fair and reasonable agreement with the Union.
The Fair Work Commission ordered that the proposed industrial action ballot could proceed, and that the Southern Midlands Council must engage in further negotiations with the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union to reach an agreement on the proposed changes to the employees' conditions of employment. The Commission also directed the Council to provide the Union with any relevant information and documentation to facilitate the negotiation process. The decision serves as a reminder to employers of the importance of good faith bargaining and the need to engage with employees and their representatives in a constructive and collaborative manner.
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.