CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union v Commonwealth of Australia (represented by Services Australia) Summary

[2023] FWC 1303

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union
v

Commonwealth of Australia (represented by Services Australia)

(B2023/503)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 1 JUNE 2023

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Commonwealth of Australia (represented by Services Australia)

This is an application by the CPSU, the Community and Public Sector 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 Commonwealth of Australia (represented by Services Australia) (Respondent).

On 31 May 2023, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent 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 Emma Louise White of the Applicant declared on 29 May 2023, 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 and Directions have been separately issued in PR762725 and PR762728 respectively.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) applied to the Fair Work Commission for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of the Commonwealth of Australia, represented by Services Australia. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), seeking to conduct a ballot to determine whether the employees wish to engage in protected action. The Commonwealth did not oppose the application. Consequently, the Vice President Catanzariti determined the matter based on the submitted papers, without the need for a hearing.

The primary legal issue before the Vice President was whether the conditions stipulated in section 437 of the Fair Work Act had been satisfied, which would allow the CPSU to proceed with the ballot. This involved verifying whether the union had genuinely attempted to reach an agreement with the employer and whether the notification period for the proposed agreement was properly adhered to. The Vice President had to assess the information provided in the statutory declaration of Emma Louise White, which detailed the bargaining process and efforts made by the CPSU to reach an agreement with the Commonwealth.

After reviewing the material, Vice President Catanzariti was satisfied that the CPSU had genuinely attempted to negotiate with the Commonwealth and that the notification period for the proposed agreement was met. Consequently, the requirements of section 443(1) of the Fair Work Act were fulfilled. As a result, the Vice President issued an order and directions in PR762725 and PR762728, respectively, permitting the CPSU to conduct the protected action ballot.

The final outcome of this decision allows the CPSU to proceed with the ballot to determine the employees' willingness to engage in protected action, as per the provisions of the Fair Work Act. This ruling underscores the importance of the notification period and the necessity for genuine bargaining efforts in the context of protected action ballots.

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

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established