The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Australian Red Cross Blood Service
Case
•
[2011] FWA 2914
•25 MAY 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Australian Red Cross Blood Service [2011] FWA 2914
[2011] FWA 2914
25 MAY 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia brought proceedings against the Australian Red Cross Blood Service, seeking a scope order to exclude medical scientists from the broader group of employees for the purpose of negotiating a new enterprise agreement. The matter was heard in the Fair Work Commission. The primary legal issue before the Commission was whether the proposed scope order would promote fair and efficient negotiations and if the group of employees proposed to be excluded was fairly chosen. Additionally, the Commission needed to determine if it was appropriate to grant the order in light of the circumstances.
The Commission considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the nature of the medical scientists' work and their relationship with the broader employee group. It was found that the proposed exclusion of medical scientists from the enterprise agreement negotiations was not necessary to promote fair and efficient negotiations. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the group proposed to be excluded was not fairly chosen, as it did not take into account the specific skills and roles of the medical scientists. Consequently, the application for the scope order was refused.
The Fair Work Commission determined that granting the proposed scope order would not facilitate fair and efficient negotiations. Additionally, the court found that the group proposed to be excluded was not fairly chosen. Therefore, the application for the scope order was refused, and no order was made to exclude medical scientists from the broader group of employees for the purpose of negotiating a new enterprise agreement.
The Commission considered the arguments presented by both parties and examined the nature of the medical scientists' work and their relationship with the broader employee group. It was found that the proposed exclusion of medical scientists from the enterprise agreement negotiations was not necessary to promote fair and efficient negotiations. Furthermore, the Commission determined that the group proposed to be excluded was not fairly chosen, as it did not take into account the specific skills and roles of the medical scientists. Consequently, the application for the scope order was refused.
The Fair Work Commission determined that granting the proposed scope order would not facilitate fair and efficient negotiations. Additionally, the court found that the group proposed to be excluded was not fairly chosen. Therefore, the application for the scope order was refused, and no order was made to exclude medical scientists from the broader group of employees for the purpose of negotiating a new enterprise agreement.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment & Labour Law
Legal Concepts
-
Collective Bargaining
-
Scope of Employment
-
Industrial Action
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Australian Workers' Union, v Boral Limited [2022] FWC 181
Cases Citing This Decision
24
Australian Red Cross Blood Service AUSTRALIAN RED CROSS BLOOD SERVICE SOUTH AUSTRALIA EMPLOYEE ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2011
[2011] FWA 6975
Australian Workers' Union, v Boral Limited
[2022] FWC 181
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
0
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Australian Red Cross Blood Service
[2010] FWA 3911
R v Hunt; Ex Parte Sean Investments Pty Ltd
[1979] HCA 32