Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd Trading as Metro Trains Melbourne

[2025] FWC 3148

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.739 - Application to deal with a dispute

Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union
v

Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd Trading AS Metro Trains Melbourne

(C2025/10234)

COMMISSIONER ALLISON

MELBOURNE, 22 OCTOBER 2025

Alleged dispute about any matters arising under the enterprise agreement and the NES;[s186(6)]

On Saturday 18 October 2025, I made an ex-tempore decision relating to an urgent section 739 dispute application made by the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Union (RTBU) under the Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd Rail Operations Enterprise Agreement 2023 (the Agreement).

The dispute related to the correct operation of the status quo provision at clause 1.11.7 of the Agreement in the context of a dispute between RTBU and Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd (Metro), relating to consultation about a new master roster (and its accompanying working rosters), which was to commence on 19 October 2025 (the new master roster).

In summary I found:

There was a dispute between the parties relating to whether Metro had engaged in consultation as required by the Agreement to implement the master roster (and its accompanying work roster) on 19 October 2025 (the consultation dispute).

The consultation dispute is a dispute about a matter arising under the Agreement at 1.11.1(a) of the disputes procedure, and therefore the status quo provision at clause 1.11.7 applies.

The status quo is that employees continue to work on the current master roster (and its accompanying work rosters), as opposed to the new master roster.

Neither of the exceptions at 1.11.7(a) or (b) apply.

Accordingly, I determined the status quo provision applies to the consultation dispute; and the status quo - being that the employees continue work on the current master roster (and its accompanying work rosters) - must continue while the consultation dispute is progressed through the dispute resolution procedure and/or until resolution.
The reasons for my decision are recorded in transcript.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

E Sarlos for the Applicant
P Willink for the Respondent

Arbitration details:

18 October 2025
Video via Microsoft Teams, Melbourne

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (RTBU) filed an urgent application under the Fair Work Act 2009, Section 739, with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) against Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd (Metro), seeking clarification and resolution regarding a dispute over the implementation of a new master roster set to commence on 19 October 2025. The crux of the dispute centred around whether Metro had adequately consulted with the union as stipulated in the Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd Rail Operations Enterprise Agreement 2023 (the Agreement). Specifically, the RTBU argued that Metro had not fulfilled its consultation obligations, while Metro maintained that it had properly engaged with the union.

The primary legal issue before the FWC was whether the status quo provision in clause 1.11.7 of the Agreement applied to the consultation dispute and, if so, what the implications were for the operation of the new master roster. The RTBU contended that the status quo provision should not apply, arguing that the dispute did not fall under the specified categories in the Agreement's dispute resolution procedure. Conversely, Metro argued that the status quo provision did apply, necessitating that employees continue working under the current master roster until the dispute was resolved. The FWC had to determine whether the dispute fell within the scope of the status quo provision and, if it did, whether any exceptions applied that would alter the status quo.

The FWC, led by Commissioner Allison, concluded that the dispute about the consultation process regarding the new master roster indeed fell under the Agreement's dispute resolution procedure. Consequently, the status quo provision at clause 1.11.7 applied, mandating that employees continue working under the current master roster until the dispute was resolved. The FWC found that neither of the exceptions outlined in clause 1.11.7(a) or (b) were applicable, thereby reinforcing the application of the status quo. The decision emphasized the importance of adhering to the consultation requirements set out in the Agreement and underscored the necessity for Metro to engage appropriately with the RTBU to implement any changes to the roster.

The final order of the FWC was that the employees should continue to work under the existing master roster (and its accompanying work rosters) until the consultation dispute was resolved through the appropriate dispute resolution processes. This decision was made to ensure continuity in operations and to maintain fairness between the parties while the underlying dispute was being addressed. The FWC's decision aimed to uphold the terms of the Agreement and ensure that any changes to work arrangements were made in accordance with the agreed dispute resolution procedures.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established