Contrary to Freemans insistence that our minimum staffing levels aren’t under attack, the very staffing clauses that much of our EBA is built upon is at threat from his, and Minister Symes, actions. We can see their hidden agenda by looking into FRV’s and Minister Symes’ Fair Work Submissions.
They are using a series of underhanded legal tactics to try and have our minimum staffing considered unconstitutional. This idea of theirs is based on a High Court decision from 1995, commonly referred to as Re AEU. One outcome of Re AEU is that minimum staffing cannot be included in an enterprise agreement approved by the Fair Work Commission.
This tactic is not new to the UFU, with the CFA previously trying to use a similar strategy to attack professional firefighters conditions. The UFU was able to defeat this attack only after taking our case to the Full Court of the Federal Court. The simplified outcome of this was that because our minimum staffing was agreed by both parties , it was allowed in the EBA.
“…in January 2015, the Full Court of the Federal Court in United Firefighters Union v Country Fire Authority (UFU decision) decided that the above limitations do not apply to enterprise agreements that cover State employers that are constitutional corporations where all the parties voluntarily agreed to the terms of an enterprise agreement.” – Victorian Government Website.
The actions used by Freeman and Minister Symes are outlined below:
· Renege on the position that everything except wages and allowances is agreed. See figure 1 ‘Commissioner Wilson statement’ compared to ‘Second FRV Statement to Fair Work Commission’.
· Raise constitutional ‘concerns’ about staffing clauses in intractable bargaining hearing. See figure 2 ‘Ministers Position Document’ and ‘Ministers outline of submissions’.
· Attempt to divide and confuse firefighters with propaganda videos. Ensure that the videos state that their staffing is not under attack, contrary to the facts. See figure 3 ‘Freeman video’.
· Tell the Fair Work Commission, and firefighters, that there is no agreement on staffing, but that FRV will not contest the current staffing clauses. This is to again confuse firefighters into thinking their staffing clauses are safe. See figure 4 ‘Fair Work Statements’, and figure 5 ‘Freeman video’.
· Due to FRV saying staffing clauses are not agreed, Fair Work will need to arbitrate. This removes the current clause from the protection of being agreed, and leaves staffing clauses as unconstitutional. See figure 6 ‘Fair Work Commission Findings’
· Decimate firefighters conditions of employment.
This has been a high level legal tactic. It was deliberately duplicitous and covert, in the hope of removing conditions by stealth. This could have been the outcome we faced had it not been for the UFU using multiple strategies in our EBA campaign. Through the lobbying efforts of the Branch Secretary, the UFU was able to get changes made to federal Intractable Bargaining Laws. These changes ensure that ‘no clause is worse off’ during arbitration.
Our staffing clause can no longer go backwards from the previous agreed position. Freeman and the Ministers attempt has FAILED.
Thank-you to all the members who stayed updated throughout this time. This post is just to provide a clear and detailed explanation on the impacts of Re AEU in the context of intractable bargaining.
Strength in Unity 
