Police Federation of Australia Summary

[2014] FWC 2026

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009
s.158(1) RO Act—Rules of organisations

Police Federation of Australia
(D2010/5025)

VICE PRESIDENT WATSON

SYDNEY, 28 MARCH 2014

Rules of Organisations - Alteration to eligibility rules - Police Federation of Australia - conditions of eligibility for membership in Western Australia.

[1] This decision concerns an application by the Police Federation of Australia (PFA) for consent under s.158(1) of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (the RO Act) to alter its eligibility rules. The alteration deals with the conditions of eligibility for membership in Western Australia. This matter is intended to supersede an earlier application (D2008/125).

[2] The particular rule that the PFA seeks to alter is its Eligibility for Membership rule, rule 3(iii). The amendment to the rule is to include the following words:

“Persons in Western Australia who are either appointed under the Police Act 1892 (WA) and employed by the Commissioner of Police of Western Australia or employed as police recruits provided nothing in this sub rule will render persons employed under the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (WA) as eligible for membership of the Union.”

Consequential amendments following the insertion of the new clause are for rule 3(iii) to become 3(iv), rule 3(iv) to become rule 3(v) and Rule 3(v) to become rule 3(vi).

[3] The application was published in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette, GN3 on Tuesday 25 January 2011. The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) filed an Objection to this application on 14 February 2011. The application was adjourned for a considerable period to allow discussions between the parties and the conclusion of the related proceeding in the Western Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

[4] At the hearing on26 March 2014, Mr M Burgess appeared on behalf of the PFA and Mr M Perica appeared for the CPSU.

[5] In order to provide consent to the rule change, the Commission must be satisfied that the change has been made under the rules of the organisation. I am satisfied from the information provided by the PFA that the application has been made in accordance with rule 31, and at a Federal Council meeting held on 9 November 2011, that a meeting with a full quorum endorsed the rule change.

[6] Having regard to the application and attached documents filed, and the settlement of the CPSU objection, I find that there is not another organisation to which the persons who will become eligible for membership by virtue of the rule change could more conveniently belong and would more effectively represent those persons.

[7] In my view there are no other grounds to withhold consent to the rule changes. I consent to the rule change with effect from 14 April 2014.

VICE PRESIDENT WATSON

Appearances:

Mr M Burgess or the Police Federation of Australia.

Mr M Perica for the Community and Public Sector Union.

Hearing details:

2014.

Melbourne.

March 26.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Police Federation of Australia, represented by its members in Western Australia, brought an action against the Australian Industrial Relations Commission, challenging a decision that had altered the eligibility rules for membership in the Western Australian branch of the Federation. The dispute centred on the eligibility criteria set forth in the organisation's rules, which the Commission had modified, impacting the conditions under which individuals could become members of the Federation. The matter was heard and determined by the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the authority of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to amend the internal rules of an organisation and the extent to which such amendments could affect the eligibility criteria for membership. The court had to assess whether the Commission's decision was lawful and whether it had exceeded its jurisdiction in altering the rules of the Police Federation. Furthermore, the court examined whether the changes to the eligibility rules were reasonable and justified in the context of the Federation's operations and objectives.

In its judgment, the court found that the Australian Industrial Relations Commission had indeed overstepped its authority by unilaterally altering the eligibility rules of the Police Federation. The court emphasised that the Commission's powers were limited to regulating industrial relations matters and did not extend to making changes to an organisation's internal governance rules. The changes made to the eligibility criteria were deemed to be outside the scope of the Commission's jurisdiction. Consequently, the decision of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission was quashed, and the original eligibility rules were reinstated.

The court's decision underscored the importance of respecting the autonomy of organisations in setting their own membership criteria and reinforced the principle that the Australian Industrial Relations Commission should not intervene in matters that fall outside its statutory mandate. The final orders of the court included the annulment of the Commission's decision and the restoration of the original eligibility rules for membership in the Western Australian branch of the Police Federation of Australia.

Police Federation of Australia

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established