DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
v
Tasmanian Water & Sewage Corporation Pty Ltd T/A TasWater
(B2021/588)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 26 JULY 2021

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Tasmanian Water & Sewage Corporation Pty Ltd T/A TasWater.

[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 Tasmanian Water & Sewage Corporation Pty Ltd T/A TasWater (Respondent).

[2] On 26 July 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 Karen Tantari 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 PR732118.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Tasmanian Water & Sewage Corporation Pty Ltd T/A TasWater, the dispute involved the union's intention to conduct a ballot among the employees of TasWater to determine support for protected action. The matter was brought before the Fair Work Commission, an Australian tribunal with jurisdiction over workplace relations and industrial disputes.

The primary legal issue before the tribunal was whether the union was entitled to conduct the proposed ballot under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The union argued that the ballot was necessary to gauge employee sentiment and prepare for potential industrial action. Conversely, TasWater contended that the ballot was premature and that the union should first engage in mandatory bargaining to resolve the dispute before seeking employee approval for protected action.

The tribunal considered the legislative framework governing industrial action and the requirements for protected action ballots. It was established that while the union had a right to organise and facilitate ballots, such actions must comply with the statutory conditions outlined in the Fair Work Act. The tribunal found that TasWater had not provided sufficient evidence to justify a stay of the ballot, and therefore, the union's right to conduct the ballot was upheld. The tribunal emphasised that the employees' right to engage in protected action was a fundamental aspect of workplace relations and that the union's proposed ballot was a legitimate step in the process of exercising those rights.

The tribunal ordered that the union could proceed with the proposed ballot of TasWater employees, subject to compliance with the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. This decision underscored the importance of the right to organise and engage in protected action as protected industrial rights, while also highlighting the need for compliance with legislative requirements to ensure a fair and lawful process.

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Tasmanian Water & Sewage Corporation Pty Ltd T/A TasWater

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established