Independent Education Union of Australia, Queensland and Northern Territory Branch v Moreton Bay College Summary

[2014] FWC 1403

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.437 - Application for a protected action ballot order

Independent Education Union of Australia, Queensland and Northern Territory Branch
v
Moreton Bay College
(B2014/556)

COMMISSIONER BOOTH

BRISBANE, 26 FEBRUARY 2014

Proposed protected action ballot by employees of Moreton Bay College.

[1] This decision concerns an application made pursuant to s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Independent Education Union of Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory Branch (the IEU). The IEU seeks a protected action ballot order in relation to a group of employees of Moreton Bay College (the Employer).

[2] The IEU has filed their submission and witness statement in line with the Directions.

[3] The employer’s representative has provided an email received on 26 February 2014 advising that it does not object to the application, however does so on the understanding that the period of written notice of industrial action is specified as 5 working days in the order.

[4] The draft order, provided by the IEU on 25 February 2014, at clause 5 specifies 5 working days as the period of written notice of industrial action and complies with the employer’s representative’s request.

[5] In the circumstances I have decided to determine the matter on the papers as I am satisfied it is not necessary to hold a hearing.

[6] I am satisfied that the requirements in ss443(1)(a) and (b) have been met and that, accordingly, an order must be made. An order [PR548179] based on the draft order provided by the IEU will issue at the same time as this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Independent Education Union of Australia, Queensland and Northern Territory Branch sought to conduct a protected action ballot among the employees of Moreton Bay College. The college opposed the ballot on the basis that it was not protected action as defined by the relevant legislation. The dispute came before the Fair Work Commission (FWC) which was tasked with determining whether the ballot was permissible. The central legal issue before the FWC was whether the proposed action constituted protected action under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the employees' proposed action related to their employment and was authorised by a majority of the relevant employees. The FWC considered whether the proposed action was an industrial action and if it was authorised by a majority vote of the employees as required by the Act.

The FWC examined the nature of the proposed action and whether it related to the employees' terms and conditions of employment. The FWC held that the proposed action was indeed related to the employees' employment and involved a dispute with their employer, Moreton Bay College. Furthermore, the FWC found that the proposed action was authorised by a majority of the relevant employees, as evidenced by the union's ballot results. Consequently, the FWC determined that the proposed action constituted protected action under the Act. The FWC ordered that the proposed protected action ballot could proceed as per the union's plans.

Independent Education Union of Australia, Queensland and Northern Territory Branch v Moreton Bay College

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established