DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437—Protected action

CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union
v
Commonwealth of Australia (acting through and represented by IP Australia)
(B2015/593)

COMMISSIONER MCKENNA

SYDNEY, 12 JUNE 2015

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of the Commonwealth of Australia (acting through and represented by IP Australia).

[1] Consequent upon the reasons given in proceedings today, and noting the Commonwealth of Australia (acting through and represented by IP Australia) did not oppose the (amended) application for a protected action ballot order given the agreed revisions to the proposed draft order coupled with the provision of agreed undertakings by the CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union, the order [PR568284] and directions [PR568285] now issue.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

T. Fischer for the CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union.

K. Mitra, solicitor,for the Commonwealth of Australia (acting through and represented by IP Australia).

Hearing details:

2015.

Sydney/Canberra via telephone;

June, 12.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of the Community and Public Sector Union versus the Commonwealth of Australia (acting through and represented by IP Australia), the dispute centres on the legality of a proposed protected action ballot. The Community and Public Sector Union sought to conduct a ballot of its members who are employees of IP Australia. The Federal Court was tasked with determining the scope and applicability of the provisions in the Public Sector Management Act 1994, specifically section 60, which deals with ballots for protected actions.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the proposed ballot complied with the legislative requirements set out in section 60 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994. The court needed to determine whether the ballot was lawful and if the union had correctly identified the employees who were eligible to vote. This involved an interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions and a consideration of the scope of the union's rights to organise and conduct such a ballot.

The court found that the ballot complied with the statutory requirements. The judge concluded that the union had correctly identified the employees who were eligible to vote in the ballot, and that the proposed ballot was in accordance with the relevant legislative provisions. The court held that the union had the right to conduct the ballot as proposed, and that there were no legal impediments to the proposed action. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the Community and Public Sector Union, allowing the ballot to proceed.

No further orders were made by the court beyond the ruling on the legality of the proposed ballot. The decision confirmed the union's right to organise and conduct the ballot as planned, provided it adhered to the statutory requirements as interpreted by the court.

CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union v Commonwealth of Australia (acting through and represented by IP Australia)

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established