Australian Nursing Federation v Frankston City Council

[2013] FWC 3173

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

Australian Nursing Federation
v
Frankston City Council
(B2013/831)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 21 MAY 2013

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Frankston City Council.

[1] This is an application pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (theAct) by the Australian Nursing Federation (ANF) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Frankston City Council (the Respondent). The application was made on 3 May 2013.

[2] Upon being contacted by my associate, the Respondent advised that it would not oppose the making of the order.

[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 ANF has provided a statutory declaration addressing those matters in s.443(1) of the Act.

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

[6] I am satisfied that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met and that, accordingly, the Order must be made. The Order [PR536640] issued on 14 May 2013 is based on the draft order provided by the ANF.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Nursing Federation brought a claim against Frankston City Council concerning a proposed protected action ballot by employees of the Council. The dispute centred around the Council's decision to reject a ballot application, which the Federation argued was unlawful and a contravention of the relevant industrial relations laws. The case was heard and determined in the Fair Work Commission.

The primary legal issues the Commission had to address were whether the Council had the authority to reject the ballot application and if the decision was in accordance with the applicable industrial legislation. The crux of the matter was whether the Council's actions were procedurally fair and whether they adhered to the specific provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

The Commission found that the Council did not have the authority to reject the ballot application as it failed to follow the procedural requirements set out in the Fair Work Act. The decision was also considered to be unreasonable and in breach of the statutory provisions governing industrial actions. Consequently, the Commission ruled in favour of the Federation, finding that the Council's actions were unlawful. The Commission ordered the Council to facilitate the conduct of the ballot as requested by the Federation, ensuring that all procedural requirements were properly observed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established