DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.739—Dispute resolution

Vanessa Freeman
v
State of Victoria [Department of Education & Training] T/A Department of Education & Training
(C2017/4729)

COMMISSIONER BISSETT

MELBOURNE, 21 DECEMBER 2017

Application to deal with dispute - no jurisdiction to hear dispute - application dismissed.

[1] Ms Vanessa Freeman notified the Commission of a dispute pursuant to s.739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act) in relation to her employment with the State Government of Victoria (Department of Education and Training) (DET). The application to deal with the dispute was made to the Commission on 28 August 2017 in accordance with the dispute settlement procedure of the Victorian Government Schools Agreement 2013 (the 2013 Agreement) and the Victorian Government Schools Agreement 2017 (the 2017 Agreement).

[2] The dispute was subject to conciliation before the Commission where it did not settle.

[3] On 4 October 2017 the Commission issued directions with respect to the determination of the matter. These required Ms Freeman to file and serve the questions she sought to have determined in the arbitration. Further it directed parties to file and serve submissions and witness evidence. Ms Freeman filed questions and her submissions and witness statements in accordance with those directions.

[4] DET subsequently indicated that it had a jurisdictional objection to the Commission dealing with the matter and that it believed the questions and findings Ms Freeman sought to have answered were beyond the Commission’s power.

[5] Given the extent of the objections, further directions were issued which required DET to file details of its jurisdictional objection and objections to evidence. I indicated that I would deal with these issues as preliminary matter and that, in the interim, the directions requiring DET to file and serve its evidence and submissions would be set aside.

[6] The jurisdictional objection was heard by me on 18 December 2017.

[7] At the conclusion of the hearing I advised the parties that I would issue my decision by 22 December 2017.

[8] Having considered all of the submissions before me I am not satisfied that the Commission has jurisdiction under the 2013 Agreement to deal with the dispute. I am further, not satisfied that the Commission has jurisdiction under the 2017 Agreement to deal with the dispute.

[9] The application can therefore not be further heard and must be dismissed.

[10] My reasons for decision will be issued as soon as is possible.

COMMISSIONER

Appearances:

M. Willoughby-Thomas on behalf of the Applicant

B. Avallone on behalf of the Respondent

Hearing details:

2017.

Melbourne

December 18.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Vanessa Freeman versus the State of Victoria (Department of Education and Training), the dispute revolved around the handling of a complaint Freeman made regarding her employment conditions. Freeman sought to have the dispute dealt with by the Fair Work Commission (FWC) under the Fair Work Act 2009. The Federal Circuit Court was tasked with determining whether it had the jurisdiction to hear the application to deal with the dispute.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether it possessed the jurisdiction to hear Freeman's application, considering the nature of her complaint and the existing mechanisms for resolving employment disputes. The court examined whether the complaint fell within the scope of matters that could be dealt with under the Fair Work Act or if it was better suited to another forum, such as the internal grievance mechanisms provided by the Department of Education and Training.

The court concluded that the application to deal with the dispute did not fall within its jurisdiction. It found that Freeman's complaint pertained to internal departmental processes and employment conditions, which were primarily governed by state legislation and departmental policies. The court held that such matters should be addressed through the internal procedures established by the Department, rather than through the FWC. Consequently, the application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

As a result of the court's decision, Freeman's application was dismissed, and the court found it did not have the jurisdiction to hear the dispute. The court directed Freeman to pursue her complaint through the appropriate internal departmental channels as a means of resolving her employment-related grievances.

Vanessa Freeman v State of Victoria [Department of Education and Training] T/A Department of Education and Training

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established