Lindy Richardson
Lindy advises on employment law, with a particular focus on industrial relations, employment, and anti-discrimination law.
View profile
A clause requiring consultation prior to implementing major change is included in all local government enterprise agreements. While consultation obligations may seem simple on their face, there is often a lack of clarity and difference of opinion about what they actually require in practice.
Last year the Fair Work Commission provided some useful clarity on this point in a matter involving Boroondara City Council, and The Australian Services Union (Union) which Maddocks represented Council.
The case emerged from major changes to both the funding model and scope of aged care services delivered under the Commonwealth Home Support Program that will begin on 1 July 2024.
Like many other local councils, Council needed to consider whether this new operating environment meant it could no longer continue to deliver such services in the same way as it had in the past. It developed a proposal to exit the provision of some in-home aged care support services, resulting in the possible redundancy of some staff positions.
During the consultation process, a dispute arose with the Union as to what was required in order for Council to meet its consultation obligations under its enterprise agreement.
Usefully, in resolving this dispute, the Commission provided guidance on the following questions:
Consistent with most local government enterprise agreements, Council’s enterprise agreement required it to, among other things, ‘provide in writing…all relevant information about the changes, including the nature of the changes proposed, the expected effects of the changes including on employees and any other matters likely to affect employees’ to the employees concerned and their representatives (except for confidential information, the disclosure of which would be contrary to Council’s interests).
Notably, the Commission confirmed the obligation to provide ‘all relevant information’ meant just that – information. Council was not required to provide all relevant documents. The obligation was far narrower and only required Council to provide information relevant to the proposed change.
The Commission also found that the information about the changes must exist and be in the possession or knowledge of the council – there is no requirement for the council to create or go searching for information, although the requirement to respond promptly to matters raised during discussions, might indeed result in council creating the information.
The fundamental purpose of providing this information was to ensure affected employees could engage in genuine discussions with Council about possible alternatives to the proposed changes. It did not impose an obligation on Council to ‘undertake an exercise of discovery’ for information that was not already in its possession or knowledge, merely on the basis that such information would enable an affected employee to ‘mount a case’ against the workplace plans.
Applying these principles to the documents requested from Boroondara City Council by the Union, the Commission found the following information had to be provided, with the exception of confidential information, the disclosure of which would be contrary to Council’s interests:
The Commission confirmed there was no obligation on Council to disclose confidential information or information where the disclosure would be contrary to its interests.
The Commission did, however, caution against taking a broad brush approach to withholding entire documents or categories of information on the basis that some of the information is confidential. The Commission suggested information may be synthesised or summarised or redacted to protect its confidentiality so at least some of the information can be provided.
The case also found unless feedback advanced by affected employees (and their representatives) that could influence the decision was communicated to the decision maker (in this case, the Councillors), the consultation clause would be futile and provide ‘no right at all’ for those impacted.
However, the Commission said only those matters which involved advocating for an alternative proposal or changes to the timing or nature of the proposal which ‘rationally have the capacity to influence the decision’ need to be made known to the decision maker. Even then, it may have been appropriate for Council to provide the Councillors with an accurate summary of the employees’ feedback rather than the responses verbatim.
While the Union contended that consultation must occur directly between the decision maker and the affected employees and their representatives, this proposition was rejected. There is no obligation requiring direct consultation between the employees/their representatives and the decision maker, such as by way of an open forum discussion in which affected employees can canvas their views. That responsibility falls to senior staff within Council. Those staff do have a responsibility to ensure a full and accurate summary of the matters raised (limited as discussed above) is provided to Councillors who are the ultimate decision makers.
If you have further questions about enterprise agreements or other employment laws in local government, please contact our Partners Lindy Richardson or Ross Jackson from our Employment, Safety & People Team.
We highlight significant issues and work our teams have delivered to Victorian local council clients over the past year.
Lindy advises on employment law, with a particular focus on industrial relations, employment, and anti-discrimination law.
View profileA leading employment lawyer, Ross has extensive experience advising government, statutory authorities and public and private sector organisations in employment and industrial relations matters.
View profileKeep up to date with our legal insights and events
Sign upThe Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth) is central to Australia’s critical infrastructure framework.
The Commonwealth Government will establish a set of Australian Standards for AI.
OAIC determinations clarify privacy obligations for organisations using tracking pixels.
Targeted changes are now in place for approvals, strategic assessments, information sharing and advisory processes.
Partner Emeritus
Melbourne