Application by National Tertiary Education Industry Union
Cited 1×
Applicant: National Tertiary Education Industry Union (NTEU)
Respondent: University of Sydney
Ratio
The FWC must make a protected action ballot order under s.443 of the Fair Work Act 2009 where an application has been made under s.437 and the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been and is genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer. Here, the application was properly made and the employer consented, satisfying both conditions.
Outcome
For applicant
granted
Authority signal
Cited 1×
Signal-weighted score: 0.0
Derived from how later decisions have treated this case. Dark green = leading authority,
green = positively treated, grey = neutral or sparse data,
amber = caution, red = treated negatively.
Key facts · 4
- The NTEU sought a protected action ballot order for its members employed by the University of Sydney
- The ballot was for employees who would be subject to a proposed enterprise agreement
- The University of Sydney consented to the granting of the order
- No issue arose as to whether the applicant was genuinely trying to reach an agreement
Factors
For
- Application made in accordance with s.437
- Employer (University of Sydney) consented to the order
- No dispute that applicant was genuinely trying to reach an agreement
- Both jurisdictional conditions under s.443(1) satisfied
Against
Legislation referenced
- Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s.437
- Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s.443
- Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s.444
- Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s.414
Concept tags · 5
Principles · 1
articulates para 3
The FWC must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if an application has been made under s.437 and the FWC is satisfied that each applicant has been and is genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer.
Archived text (635 words)
Application by National Tertiary Education Industry Union [2013] FWC 281 (16 January 2013)
[2013] FWC 281
[Note: a correction has been issued to this document - see
2013FWC281_PR533305
signed 18 January 2013]
FAIR WORK COMMISSION
DECISION
Fair Work Act 2009
s.437
- Application for a protected action ballot order
National Tertiary Education Industry Union
v
University Of Sydney
(B2013/15)
DEPUTY PRESIDENT SMITH
SYDNEY, 16 JANUARY 2013
Proposed protected action ballot by employees of University of Sydney.
[1]
This is an application for a protected action ballot order by members of the National Tertiary Education Industry Union (“the
NTEU”) employed by the University of Sydney. The application is made pursuant to
s.437
of the
Fair Work Act 2009
(“the Act”).
[2]
The applicant seeks to ballot employees of the University of Sydney who are members of the NTEU and who would be subject to the proposed
enterprise agreement.
[3]
In considering this matter I must apply
s.443
of the Act which provides:
443 When FWA must make a protected action ballot order
(1) FWA must make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement if:
(a) an application has been made under
section 437
; and
(b) FWA is satisfied that each applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement with the employer of the employees
who are to be balloted.
(2) FWA must not make a protected action ballot order in relation to a proposed enterprise agreement except in the circumstances referred
to in subsection (1).
(3) A protected action ballot order must specify the following:
(a) the name of each applicant for the order;
(b) the group or groups of employees who are to be balloted;
(c) the date by which voting in the protected action ballot closes;
(d) the question or questions to be put to the employees who are to be balloted, including the nature of the proposed industrial action.
(4) If FWA decides that a person other than the Australian Electoral Commission is to be the protected action ballot agent for the
protected action ballot, the protected action ballot order must also specify:
(a) the person that FWA decides, under
subsection 444(1)
, is to be the protected action ballot agent; and
(b) the person (if any) that FWA decides, under
subsection 444(3)
, is to be the independent advisor for the ballot.
(5) If FWA is satisfied, in relation to the proposed industrial action that is the subject of the protected action ballot, that there
are exceptional circumstances justifying the period of written notice referred to in paragraph 414(2)(a) being longer than 3 working
days, the protected action ballot order may specify a longer period of up to 7 working days.
Note: Under
subsection 414(1)
, before a person engages in employee claim action for a proposed enterprise agreement, a bargaining representative of an employee
who will be covered by the agreement must give written notice of the action to the employer of the employee.
[4]
To begin, I am satisfied that the application has been made in accordance with
s.437
of the Act.
[5]
The next matter to which attention must be given is whether or not the applicant has been, and is, genuinely trying to reach an agreement
with the employer of the employees who are to be balloted.
[6]
The University of Sydney indicated that it consents to the granting of this order. As such, I have no reason to believe that an issue
regarding whether the applicant has been genuinely trying to reach an agreement arises.
[7]
Having decided that
s.443(1)(a)
and (b) have been complied with, I must make a protected action ballot order, as sought by the NTEU. My order will issue shortly.
DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, PR533151>