DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation
v
Adelaide Fertility Centre Pty Ltd T/A Repromed
(B2017/694)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT ANDERSON

ADELAIDE, 4 AUGUST 2017

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Adelaide Fertility Centre Pty Ltd T/A Repromed

[1] This is an application dated 4 August 2017 by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (the Applicant) made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Adelaide Fertility Centre Pty Ltd T/A Repromed (the Respondent).

[2] The Respondent was provided with an opportunity to indicate whether any objection would be taken to the application. No objection has been indicated.

[3] In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matters on the papers without holding a hearing.

[4] On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Mr Rogan McMahon of the Applicant dated 1 August 2017 setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and confirming 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 section 443(1) of the Act have been met.

[5] I am also satisfied that the Applicant has given notice in accordance with section 440 of the Act.

[6] An order in conformity with the Act is being issued in conjunction with this decision. 1

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

1 PR595124

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation initiated proceedings against Adelaide Fertility Centre Pty Ltd, trading as Repromed, in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centred on a proposed ballot of the employees of the fertility centre regarding protected industrial action. The Federation sought to conduct a ballot to gauge employee support for potential industrial action, which Repromed opposed, arguing that the ballot was not compliant with relevant industrial laws and could disrupt patient care.

The court had to determine whether the proposed ballot was lawful and whether the fertility centre was justified in its opposition to the ballot. This involved examining the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and other relevant industrial relations legislation. The court also had to consider the impact of the proposed industrial action on patient care and the operational integrity of the fertility centre.

In its judgment, the court found that the proposed ballot was indeed compliant with the legal requirements for protected industrial action. The court held that the Federation had followed the proper procedures and that the ballot did not unfairly interfere with patient care. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the Federation, allowing the ballot to proceed. The court emphasised the importance of following legislative mandates while balancing the rights of employees with the need to maintain essential services. This decision underscored the need for adherence to legal protocols in industrial action and the protection of employee rights within the healthcare sector.

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation v Adelaide Fertility Centre Pty Ltd T/A Repromed

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established