| [2022] FWC 2379 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
| DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action
Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation
v
Princes Court Homes Inc. T/A Princes Court Homes Hostel
(B2022/1345)
| DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY | MELBOURNE, 7 SEPTEMBER 2022 |
Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Princes Court Homes Hostel
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 Princes Court Homes Inc. trading as Princes Court Homes Hostel (the Respondent).
On 7 September 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent does 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 Alexandra Rossi 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.
The Applicant also sought that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) be the ballot agent for the protected action ballot. This course was not opposed by the Respondent. The person proposed in the application as the protected action ballot agent is Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd trading as CiVS (CiVS). Mr Michael M Michael, the Managing Director of CiVS has provided a statutory declaration setting out that he would carry out the functions of the protected ballot agent for CiVS, and that he has relevant experience in conducting protected action ballots. I am satisfied that CiVS is a fit and proper person to conduct the ballot. I am also satisfied that Mr Michael and CiVS are capable of ensuring the secrecy and security of the votes and of conducting the ballot expeditiously. CiVS has agreed to be the protected action ballot agent and Mr Michael and CiVS are bound to comply with the Privacy Act 1998 with respect to the handling of the information relating to the protected action ballot.
Therefore I appoint CiVS as the protected action ballot agent.
An order has been separately issued in PR745585.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<PR745584>
- AGLC
- Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation v Princes Court Homes Inc. T/A Princes Court Homes Hostel [2022] FWC 2379
- Case
- [2022] FWC 2379
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues in the case included whether the notification time in relation to the proposed agreement was met, and whether the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act were satisfied. Additionally, the ANMF sought to appoint a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission as the ballot agent for the protected action ballot. The respondent did not oppose this, and the proposed ballot agent, Democratic Outcomes Pty Ltd trading as CiVS, provided a statutory declaration confirming its suitability and capability to conduct the ballot. The Deputy President was satisfied that CiVS was a fit and proper person to conduct the ballot and that Mr Michael and CiVS were capable of ensuring the secrecy and security of the votes and conducting the ballot expeditiously.
In light of the above, the Deputy President appointed CiVS as the protected action ballot agent. The decision was made considering the declaration of Ms Alexandra Rossi of the ANMF and the statutory declaration provided by Mr Michael, Managing Director of CiVS. The order for the appointment of CiVS as the protected action ballot agent was separately issued in PR745585.
The final orders were issued in PR745584, appointing CiVS as the protected action ballot agent for the proposed action ballot of the employees of Princes Court Homes Hostel. The decision ensures that the ANMF can proceed with the ballot process while maintaining the secrecy and security of the votes, as well as the timely and efficient conduct of the ballot.
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.