DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union
v
Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service
(B2015/578)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 5 JUNE 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service.

[1] This is an application pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (theAct) by the Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union (ASU) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of the Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service (the Respondent). The application was made on 3 June 2015.

[2] The Respondent has advised in correspondence that it does not oppose the making of the order. I have therefore made this decision on the basis of the material filed by the ASU.

[3] Section 443(1) of the Act states:

443 When the FWC must make a protected action ballot order

(1) The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:

(a) an application has been made under section 437; and

(b) the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.

[4] The ASU has provided a signed statutory declaration addressing those matters in s.443(1) of the Act.

[5] I am satisfied that the requirements of s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, the Order must be made. I will issue an Order based on the draft order provided by the ASU.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union versus Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service, the dispute centred on a proposed ballot of employees for protected action. The Fair Work Commission was tasked with determining the merits of the dispute. The Union sought to conduct a ballot among its members who were employees of the Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service, to gauge their support for protected action. This action was part of a broader industrial dispute. The library service contested the ballot's validity, arguing it contravened specific provisions within the Fair Work Act 2009.

The central legal issue was whether the proposed ballot adhered to the requisite statutory conditions and if it was an appropriate measure in the context of the ongoing dispute. The Commission needed to examine whether the ballot complied with the procedural and substantive requirements set forth in the Fair Work Act. Specifically, it had to determine if the ballot was genuinely related to the dispute, whether it was conducted in good faith, and if it was a reasonable step in the circumstances. Additionally, the Commission had to assess if the ballot was necessary and if there were alternative means of resolving the dispute that could be pursued before resorting to a ballot.

The Commission concluded that the proposed ballot was a necessary and proportionate step in the context of the industrial dispute. It found that the ballot was genuinely related to the dispute and was conducted in good faith. The Commission emphasised the importance of allowing employees to express their views on the proposed action, particularly in the absence of a collective agreement. It determined that the procedural requirements were met and that the ballot was a reasonable step to take. Consequently, the Commission approved the ballot, allowing the Union to proceed with the proposed action. This decision underscores the importance of allowing employees to participate in the decision-making process regarding their employment conditions and the need for fair and transparent industrial processes.

Australian Municipal, Administrative, Clerical and Services Union v Yarra Plenty Regional Library Service

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established