Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation v Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated T/A Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated (Acha)

[2022] FWC 314

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation
v

Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated T/A Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated (ACHA)

(B2022/72)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 15 FEBRUARY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated.

This is an application by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated (Respondent).

On 15 February 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to the application.

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 declaration of Ms Elizabeth Dooley 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.

An order has been separately issued in 738390.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) sought a declaration that a proposed ballot of employees of Adelaide Community Healthcare Alliance Incorporated (ACHA) for protected action was not valid. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission (FWC). The central issue before the FWC was whether the proposed ballot complied with the necessary legal requirements for protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Specifically, the court had to determine if the ballot notice provided adequate information to the employees to make an informed decision about participating in the protected action.

The FWC found that the proposed ballot notice did not meet the statutory requirements for protected action as it failed to adequately inform the employees about the nature of the protected action and the potential consequences. The notice was considered misleading and insufficient in providing the necessary details to allow employees to make an informed decision. Consequently, the FWC concluded that the ballot was invalid. The FWC's decision was based on the principle that for a ballot to be valid, it must comply with all statutory requirements designed to ensure transparency and informed consent among employees. Given the inadequacies in the ballot notice, the FWC declared the proposed ballot invalid.

As a result of the court's findings, the FWC ordered that the proposed ballot could not proceed. The court's decision provided clarity on the requirements for a valid ballot under the Fair Work Act and reinforced the importance of transparency and employee awareness in industrial actions.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established