The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation has launched a brace of applications in Hobart. A s.238 (application for a scope order) and a s.240 (application to deal with a bargaining dispute) will both be heard by Fair Work Commissioner Roberts.
November 26, 2015
Calvary Home Care Services Ltd is to defend a s.394 (application for unfair dismissal remedy) lodged by an ex-employer (Lawrence) in Port Augusta.
November 26, 2015
The Lithgow Community Private Hospital and NSWMNA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018 is being heard by Fair Work Deputy President Booth.
November 26, 2015
An application for approval of the Just Better Care Central Coast Enterprise Agreement 2015 is being reviewed by Fair Work Deputy President Booth.
November 26, 2015
UnitingCare Wesley Adelaide Inc will face the Fair Work Full Bench today as a miscreant (Ha) tries to overturn a previous decision.
November 25, 2015
The Fair Work Commission has approved the Darebin Community Health Medical Practitioners Single Enterprise Agreement 2015-2018.
November 25, 2015
CPSU, the Community and Public Sector Union and the Department of Human Services are in a s.739 (application to deal with a dispute in relation to flexible working arrangements) arm wrestle before Fair Work Commissioner Bissett in Melbourne at 3pm today.
November 25, 2015
Enterprise bargaining – scope order – s.238 Fair Work Act 2009 – two applications for scope orders by bargaining representatives involved in negotiations for a proposed enterprise agreement for medical practitioners employed in the ACT public service – first applicant submitted that radiation oncologists should be excluded from coverage of agreement – first applicant submitted that there existed clear differences in operation and organisation, and a geographical distinction, of radiation oncologists and all other medical practitioners employed by the respondent – first applicant further submitted that he was meeting good faith bargaining requirements and that bargaining would be fairer and more efficient if the order was made – second applicant submitted that respondent had refused to address issues in her log of claims and that the question of scope had led to an impasse, thereby preventing the fair and efficient conduct of bargaining – second applicant submitted she was meeting good faith bargaining requirements – second applicant submitted that managerial responsibilities of SMPs were significant and that a separate agreement would recognise their seniority – respondent submitted that granting the scope orders would not result in a fairer or more efficient bargaining process than that currently underway – respondent disputed that radiation oncologists were organisationally of geographically distinct – respondent disputed that bargaining was deadlocked – Commission must be satisfied conditions of s.238(4) of FW Act met – Commission not satisfied that granting scope orders would make bargaining fairer or more efficient – applicants’ concerns about fairness of bargaining largely reflect dissatisfaction with the outcomes of the process – Commission also not satisfied that radiation oncologists or SMPs are geographically, operationally or organisationally distinct – Commission not satisfied that it was reasonable in all circumstances to make the orders – applications dismissed. Wilson and Anor v Australian Capital Territory as represented by ACT Health Directorate and Ors
