KDR Victoria Pty Ltd T/A Yarra Trams v Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union

[2021] FWC 4276

[2021] FWC 4276

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.739—Dispute resolution

KDR Victoria Pty Ltd T/A Yarra Trams
v
Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union
(C2021/3771)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK MELBOURNE, 20 JULY 2021

Alleged dispute about any matters arising under the enterprise agreement.

[1] KDR Victoria Pty Ltd (Yarra Trams) has applied under s 739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 for the Commission to deal with a dispute in accordance with the dispute settlement procedure in clause 11 of the Yarra Trams Enterprise Agreement 2019 – Operations. Separately, the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union (RTBU) has commenced proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia. Both proceedings involve substantially the same factual and interpretative issues.

[2] The application was listed for conference this morning during which the following matters were note and agreed:

•  the RTBU filed an application in the Federal Court of Australia, which arises from the same set of facts and that the RTBU has a preference in pursuing its application in the Federal Court of Australia, instead of dispute resolution in the Commission;

•  Yarra Trams has a preference for dispute resolution under the Yarra Trams Enterprise Agreement 2019 – Operations;

•  Yarra Trams will apply for an order for a separate question to be decided by the Federal Court of Australia pursuant to rule 30.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). The question will be in the following terms: “Does the First Respondent propose to contravene the Yarra Trams Enterprise Agreement 2019 - Operations and propose to contravene s.50 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) in the manner alleged at paragraphs 19 to 23 of the Statement of Claim dated 2 July 2021? Ancillary orders for the exchange of materials will also be the subject of the application; and

•  the RTBU will consent to the application under rule 30.01.

[3] Whether Yarra Trams is successful in its application for a separate question to be decided will be a matter for the Court however in the interim I consider the appropriate course is to adjourn this application sine die with liberty to apply.

Orders

[4] I order as follows:

1. The application in proceeding in C2021/3771 is adjourned sine die;

2. The parties are granted liberty to apply progress the application.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR731857>