The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Case [2023] FWC 1137


[2023] FWC 1137

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.236—Majority support determination

The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia
v

Civil Aviation Safety Authority

(B2022/1429)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT DEAN

CANBERRA, 15 MAY 2023

Application for a majority support determination – application dismissed.

  1. This decision concerns an application made by The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) for a majority support determination pursuant to s.236 of the Fair Work Act 2009 with respect to certain employees of Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).

  1. Sections 236 and 237 of the Act are in the following terms:

236     Majority support determinations

(1)       A bargaining representative of an employee who will be covered by a proposed single enterprise agreement may apply to the FWC for a determination (a majority support determination) that a majority of the employees who will be covered by the agreement want to bargain with the employer, or employers, that will be covered by the agreement.

(2)       The application must specify:

(a)       the employer, or employers, that will be covered by the agreement; and
(b)       the employees who will be covered by the agreement.”

237     When the FWC must make a majority support determination

Majority support determination

(1)       The FWC must make a majority support determination in relation to a proposed single enterprise agreement if:

(a)       an application for the determination has been made; and
(b)       the FWC is satisfied of the matters set out in subsection (2) in relation to the agreement.

Matters of which the FWC must be satisfied before making a majority support determination

(2)       The FWC must be satisfied that:

(a)       a majority of the employees:

(i)           who are employed by the employer or employers at a time determined by the FWC; and

(ii)          who will be covered by the agreement;

want to bargain; and

(b)       the employer, or employers, that will be covered by the agreement have not yet agreed to bargain, or initiated bargaining, for the agreement; and
(c)       that the group of employees who will be covered by the agreement was fairly chosen; and
(d)       it is reasonable in all the circumstances to make the determination.

(3)       For the purposes of paragraph (2)(a), the FWC may work out whether a majority of employees want to bargain using any method the FWC considers appropriate.

(3A)     If the agreement will not cover all of the employees of the employer or employers covered by the agreement, the FWC must, in deciding for the purposes of paragraph (2)(c) whether the group of employees who will be covered was fairly chosen, take into account whether the group is geographically, operationally or organisationally distinct.

Operation of determination

(4)       The determination comes into operation on the day on which it is made.

  1. This application has a long history, however for reasons that will be apparent, it is unnecessary to set out the background in any detail.

  1. Relevantly for present purposes, on Thursday 11 May 2023 CASA initiated bargaining for an enterprise agreement that covers all employees who are the subject of this application for a majority support determination by the issuing of a Notice of Representational Rights (NERR).

  1. At a conference listed today, APESMA confirmed that the NERR had been issued and asked the Commission to determine the application based on the material before it.

  1. It is not in contention that s.237(2)(b) of the Act requires that the Commission must be satisfied that CASA has not initiated bargaining before a majority support determination can be made. Given CASA has now initiated bargaining, this fundamental prerequisite cannot be met. Accordingly, the application must be dismissed.


DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<PR761883>

Details
AGLC
The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia v Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2023] FWC 1137
Case
[2023] FWC 1137
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involved an application by The Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) to the Fair Work Commission (FWC) for a majority support determination under section 236 of the Fair Work Act 2009. APESMA sought the determination in relation to certain employees of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The application sought to establish that a majority of the specified employees wanted to bargain with CASA for a proposed enterprise agreement. The application was dismissed by the Deputy President.

The primary legal issue the FWC had to decide was whether the application could proceed given that CASA had initiated bargaining for an enterprise agreement by issuing a Notice of Representational Rights (NERR) on 11 May 2023, the day before the application was to be heard. Section 237(2)(b) of the Act requires that the FWC must be satisfied CASA has not initiated bargaining before it can make a majority support determination. Since CASA had initiated bargaining, this fundamental prerequisite was not met.

The Deputy President found that the NERR had been issued and that APESMA had confirmed this at the conference. Since CASA had initiated bargaining, it was no longer appropriate for the FWC to make a majority support determination. The Deputy President concluded that the application must be dismissed because the fundamental prerequisite of section 237(2)(b) of the Act could not be satisfied. The application was dismissed.

The Deputy President dismissed the application for a majority support determination by APESMA. This decision means that APESMA cannot proceed with its application given that CASA had already initiated bargaining by issuing a NERR.

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.