Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees v West Moreton Hospital and Health Service

The Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union of Employees sought a review of decisions made by the West Moreton Hospital and Health Service, challenging the manner in which investigations into workplace incidents were conducted and the subsequent actions taken against employees. The dispute was heard in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, with the Union arguing that the Health Service had breached the Industrial Relations Act 2016 by taking adverse action against employees. The Union argued that the initiation of investigations and the placement of employees on alternative duties while investigations were ongoing constituted adverse action. Additionally, the Union claimed that the exemption for certain decisions provided in section 282(6) of the IR Act did not apply to the actions taken by the Health Service.

The court was required to determine whether the Health Service had exercised a workplace right when it initiated investigations, and if the commencement of these investigations constituted adverse action under the IR Act. The court also needed to decide if the suspension of employees on full pay and their placement on alternative duties constituted adverse action. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the exemption provided in section 282(6) of the IR Act applied to decisions made under sections 137 and 187 of the Public Service Act 2008, and Part 9 of the Hospital and Health Boards Act 2011, as well as whether a collaborative decision-making process was involved.

The court found that the Health Service did exercise a workplace right when it initiated investigations into workplace incidents. However, it determined that the initiation of these investigations did not constitute adverse action. The court also found that the suspension of employees on full pay and their placement on alternative duties did not constitute adverse action. Regarding the exemption provided in section 282(6) of the IR Act, the court concluded that it did apply to the decisions made by the Health Service under the relevant Acts. The court further found that a collaborative decision-making process was involved, which mitigated against a finding of adverse action.

The court dismissed the Union's application and ordered that particular exhibits be suppressed. The decision clarified the scope of workplace rights and the definition of adverse action under the IR Act, providing guidance for future cases involving similar issues.