Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v Sydney Trains Summary

[2022] FWC 117

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union
v

Sydney Trains;
NSW Trains T/A NSW TrainLink

(B2022/26)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 24 JANUARY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Sydney Trains and NSW Trains

This is an application by the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Sydney Trains and NSW Trains T/A NSW TrainLink (Respondents).

On 20 January 2022, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondents did not oppose 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 statutory declaration of Peter Matthews of the Applicant declared on 19 January 2022, 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 PR737691.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union has applied to the Fair Work Commission under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for an order allowing a ballot of employees of Sydney Trains and NSW Trains T/A NSW TrainLink for protected action. The application was made without opposition from the respondents. The Vice President, Catanzariti, determined the matter based on the documents submitted, including a statutory declaration by Peter Matthews of the Applicant, which detailed the steps taken by the Applicant in bargaining with the Respondents, and that the Applicant had been genuinely trying to reach an agreement.

The legal issues in this case pertain to whether the statutory requirements for a protected action ballot were met and if the notification period for the proposed agreement was correctly identified. The Vice President was required to consider the evidence provided and determine if the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employer, as stipulated by section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009.

After reviewing the material submitted, the Vice President found that the requirements for a protected action ballot were satisfied, including the notification period for the proposed agreement. The Vice President was satisfied that the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employers, and the statutory requirements were met. Consequently, the Vice President issued an order permitting the ballot.

The final orders were issued separately in PR737691. The decision underscores the importance of unions following the legal processes outlined in the Fair Work Act when seeking to conduct protected action, ensuring that all statutory requirements are met to protect the rights of both employees and employers.

Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v Sydney Trains

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established