[2014] FWC 2227 |
FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.459 - Application to extend the 30 day period in which industrial action is authorised by protected action ballot
Queensland Nurses' Union of Employees
v
Mater Misericordiae Health Services Brisbane Limited
(B2014/653)
COMMISSIONER SIMPSON | BRISBANE, 3 APRIL 2014 |
Application to extend the 30-day period in relation to Order 547424.
[1] On 2 April 2014, the Queensland Nurses’ Union (QNU) made an application under s.459(3) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) to extend the period in which certain industrial action is to commence for purposes of s.459(1)(d)(ii) of the Act in respect of the order 547424. The relevant employer is Mater Misericordiae Health Services Brisbane Limited.
[2] Section 459 of the Act reads as follows:
459 Circumstances in which industrial action is authorised by protected action ballot
(1) Industrial action by employees is authorised by a protected action ballot if:
(a) the action was the subject of the ballot; and
(b) at least 50% of the employees on the roll of voters for the ballot voted in the ballot; and
(c) more than 50% of the valid votes were votes approving the action; and
(d) the action commences:
(i) during the 30-day period starting on the date of the declaration of the results of the ballot; or
(ii) if FWC has extended that period under subsection (3)—during the extended period.
Note: Under Division 2, industrial action by employees for a proposed enterprise agreement (other than employee response action) is not protected industrial action unless it has been authorised in advance by a protected action ballot.
(2) If:
(a) the nature of the proposed industrial action specified in the question or questions put to the employees in the protected action ballot included periods of industrial action of a particular duration; and
(b) the question or questions did not specify that consecutive periods of that industrial action may be organised or engaged in;
then only the first period in a series of consecutive periods of that industrial action is the subject of the ballot for the purposes of paragraph (1)(a).
(3) FWC may extend the 30-day period referred to in subparagraph (1)(d)(i) by up to 30 days if:
(a) an applicant for the protected action ballot order applies to FWC for the period to be extended; and
(b) the period has not previously been extended.
[3] Section 459(3) of the Act vests a discretion in Fair Work Commission (FWC) in respect of whether to grant such an application upon the two factual preconditions (at s.459(3)(a) and 459(3)(b) of the Act being made out.
[4] The employer provided a written response on 3 April 2014 to the Application and indicated that it did not wish to be heard on the application.
[5] Neither party sought a hearing in relation to this application. I have made a determination on the papers.
[6] There does not appear to me to be any evidence before me that would dissuade me from exercising my discretion in favour of the Applicant.
[7] I therefore order that the 30-day period referred to in s.459(1)(d)(i) of the Act be extended by a further 30 days.
[8] An order to that effect will issue simultaneously with this decision.
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR549298>
- AGLC
- Queensland Nurses' Union of Employees v Mater Misericordiae Health Services Brisbane Limited [2014] FWC 2227
- Case
- [2014] FWC 2227
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Union could be granted an extension to appeal the decision, considering that the 30-day period for filing an appeal had already lapsed. The Union argued that there were exceptional circumstances that warranted the extension, and they had acted promptly in seeking the extension. Mater Misericordiae Health Services Brisbane Limited, on the other hand, contended that the Union had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances and that the appeal should not be allowed.
The Fair Work Commission found that the Union had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances that would warrant an extension of the 30-day period. The court held that the Union had not acted promptly in seeking the extension and that the extension should not be granted. The Union's application to extend the 30-day period was dismissed.
The Fair Work Commission did not make any further orders in the matter. The decision of the Commission was final, and the Union was not granted an extension to appeal the decision made in relation to Order 547424.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.