The Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association v Qantas Airways Ltd

[2022] FWC 1678

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.437—Protected action

The Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association
v

Qantas Airways Ltd

(B2022/621)

VICE PRESIDENT CATANZARITI

SYDNEY, 30 JUNE 2022

Proposed protected action ballot of employees of Qantas Airways Ltd

This is an application by the Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association (Applicant) made under s.437 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (Act) for a protected action ballot order in relation to certain employees of Qantas Airways Ltd (Respondent).

On 29 June 2022, the Fair Work Commission was advised that the Respondent did not oppose the application.

In the circumstances, I have decided to determine the matter on the papers without holding a hearing.

On the basis of the material before me, including the statutory declaration of Stephen Purvinas of the Applicant declared on 28 June 2022, setting out the steps taken by it in bargaining with the Respondent and that it has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach agreement with the Respondent, I am satisfied that there is a notification time in relation to the proposed agreement and that the requirements in s.443(1) of the Act have been met.

An Order has been separately issued in PR743221.

VICE PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Australian Licenced Aircraft Engineers Association (the applicant) applied to the Fair Work Commission for an order allowing a ballot of certain employees of Qantas Airways Ltd to take protected industrial action. Qantas did not oppose the application. The matter was decided on the papers before the Vice President without a hearing.

The legal issue for determination was whether the applicant had met the requirements of the Fair Work Act 2009 for a protected action ballot. Specifically, the Vice President needed to be satisfied that there was a notification period in relation to a proposed agreement and that the applicant had been genuinely attempting to reach agreement with Qantas.

The Vice President was satisfied that the applicant had met the requirements for a protected action ballot based on the material before the court, including a statutory declaration by Stephen Purvinas of the applicant setting out the bargaining process and the applicant's good faith efforts to reach agreement with Qantas. The Vice President found that the notification period had been met and that the requirements of section 443(1) of the Act were satisfied. An order was issued in the matter.

The Vice President ordered that the applicant be allowed to conduct a ballot of certain employees of Qantas to take protected industrial action. The order was issued in PR743221.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established