Municipal and Utilities Workers Union v Surf Coast Shire Summary

[2022] FWC 2595

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

Municipal and Utilities Workers Union
v

Surf Coast Shire

(B2022/1457)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CLANCY

MELBOURNE, 27 SEPTEMBER 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Surf Coast Shire

This is an application by the Municipal and Utilities Workers Union (MUWU) (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Surf Coast Shire (Respondent).

On 27 September 2022, my Associate was advised that the Respondent did not object to 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 declaration of Mr Brian Parkinson of the Applicant 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 PR746243.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Fair Work Commission heard an application by the Municipal and Utilities Workers Union (MUWU) seeking an order for a protected action ballot in relation to certain employees of Surf Coast Shire. The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009, and the matter was determined on the papers after Surf Coast Shire did not object to the application. The dispute centred around the union's request to hold a ballot to allow its members to vote on protected industrial action due to ongoing difficulties in reaching an agreement with the employer over certain terms and conditions of employment.

The key legal issue before the Deputy President was whether the union had fulfilled the necessary requirements to hold a protected action ballot. This included verifying that the union had genuinely attempted to negotiate with the employer and that there was a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement, as stipulated by section 443(1) of the Act. The union submitted a declaration from Mr. Brian Parkinson, outlining the steps taken during the bargaining process and affirming their efforts to reach an agreement with Surf Coast Shire.

Upon reviewing the materials provided, Deputy President Clancy concluded that the union had indeed met the necessary criteria for a protected action ballot. The evidence presented demonstrated that the union had been genuinely attempting to reach an agreement with the employer and that a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement existed. Consequently, the Deputy President was satisfied that the requirements for a protected action ballot had been met, and an order was issued in PR746243.

Municipal and Utilities Workers Union v Surf Coast Shire

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established