National Tertiary Education Industry Union v University of Canberra

[2022] FWC 2017

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

National Tertiary Education Industry Union
v

University of Canberra

(B2022/1148)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 29 JULY 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of University of Canberra

This is an application by the National Tertiary Education Industry 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 the University of Canberra (Respondent).

On 29 July 2022, 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 David Vincent-Pietsch of the Applicant declared on 27 July 2022, 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 PR744348.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of National Tertiary Education Industry Union v University of Canberra involved the National Tertiary Education Industry Union (the Applicant) applying for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of the University of Canberra (the Respondent). The application was made under section 437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act). The Union sought to conduct a protected action ballot as part of its efforts to negotiate a new enterprise agreement with the University. The Respondent did not oppose the application, and the matter proceeded on the papers submitted by the Applicant.

The legal issues before the Commission were whether the Union had complied with the requirements under section 443(1) of the Act in relation to the notification time for the proposed agreement, and whether the Union had genuinely been trying to reach an agreement with the University. The Commission considered the statutory declaration of David Vincent-Pietsch of the Applicant, which outlined the steps taken in bargaining with the University and the Union's efforts to reach an agreement. The Commission was satisfied that the Union had met the notification time requirements and had genuinely been trying to reach an agreement with the University.

Having considered the material before it, the Commission determined that the Union had satisfied the requirements of the Act and granted the application for a protected action ballot order. The Commission noted that an Order had already been issued in PR744348, indicating that the application was being treated as a separate matter. The decision was made on 29 July 2022 by Vice President Catanzariti, who was satisfied with the information provided by the Union and the lack of opposition from the University.

The Fair Work Commission granted the Union's application for a protected action ballot order, allowing the Union to proceed with the ballot in relation to the proposed agreement with the University of Canberra. This decision enabled the Union to pursue its efforts to negotiate a new enterprise agreement with the University, provided that the necessary procedural requirements were met. The Commission's decision was based on the information provided by the Union and the absence of any opposition from the University.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established