New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union v Liverpool City Council [2024] NSWIRComm 11

Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union v Liverpool City Council [2024] NSWIRComm 11 Hearing dates: 13 August 2024, 26 September 2024, 8 October 2024, 4 November 2024 Date of orders: 18 November 2024 Decision date: 18 November 2024 Jurisdiction: Industrial Relations Commission Before: Paingakulam J, Deputy President Decision: Recommendation at paragraph [13] Catchwords: EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL LAW – Public sector – Recruitment and hiring Category: Procedural rulings Parties: New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union (Notifier) Liverpool City Council (Respondent) Representation: D Papps (Notifier) R Nassif (Respondent) File Number(s): 2024/270212 Publication restriction: Nil

STATEMENT AND RECOMMENDATION 1. In these proceedings I have decided to make a recommendation, which I will read at the conclusion of this short statement. 2. On 23 July 2024, the New South Wales Local Government Clerical, Administrative, Energy, Airlines and Utilities Union (USU), represented by Mr Daniel Papps, notified a dispute in respect of lack of consultation by the management of Liverpool City Council in relation to size and composition of the workforce as a result of ongoing staff concerns about the slow filing of existing staff vacancies and the creation of new roles which do not address staff workload concerns. Liverpool City Council has been represented by Mr Ross Nassif in this matter. 3. The USU asserted that the communications by Liverpool City Council about changes in workforce numbers had been made in breach of Clause 42 of the Local Government (State) Award 2023 which obliged Liverpool City Council to notify the USU, in writing, of workplace change that was likely to have a significant effect. Further there was a lack of clarity in Liverpool City Council's communications about its intent in relation to workforce size and structure. 4. The dispute was notified in the context of uncertainty about the future of Liverpool City Council, in the face of upcoming New South Wales local government elections and the appointment of an interim Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Following the outcome of the New South Wales local government elections on 14 September 2024, recruitment for a permanent CEO has commenced. 5. In addition, there had been communications by both parties which tended to exacerbate long running tensions between them, rather than facilitate constructive discussion about the central matters in issue. 6. When the dispute was first before me on 13 August 2024, Liverpool City Council had already undertaken a significant amount of work to reconcile records from multiple sources about the number and nature of existing vacancies. During the course of those discussions, an in-principle agreement was reached concerning the provision by Liverpool City Council of certain information to the USU that the USU was seeking. Undertakings were also given by both parties about the timing, content and manner in which the progress of this issue could be communicated, particularly to USU members. The matter was stood over to 26 September 2024 to allow those things to occur and for the USU to ascertain next steps with the benefit of the additional information sought. 7. When the matter retuned to the Commission on 26 September 2024, little progress had been made in relation to the provision of information about current vacancies by Liverpool City Council to the USU, which was still seeking to understand the current organisational structure at Liverpool City Council. This gave rise to communications by the USU to its members in which strident complaints about Liverpool City Council were made. A further timetable was put in place for Liverpool City Council to provide the USU with the information that it was seeking (with a report back to confirm that this had occurred to take place on 8 October 2024), and the matter was set down for further conciliation on 4 November 2024. 8. On 8 October 2024, the USU confirmed that Liverpool City Council had provided the information that it was seeking regarding current vacancies and was consulting its members concerning the progression of that issue. The USU also acknowledged an agreement to adopt a more conciliatory tone in its communication to members. 9. By 4 November 2024, the USU was seeking further information from Liverpool City Council as a result of the information that it had received. Liverpool City Council was more concerned with re-establishing a positive process for union consultation as to organisational structure. Nonetheless, Liverpool City Council consented to the provision of further itemised information to the USU. 10. For its part, the USU seeks to obtain an understanding of the current baseline organisational structure of Liverpool City Council at a specified date so that it can engage meaningfully in discussions concerning any significant change to that structure following the appointment of the new CEO. 11. As at today, I am advised that further information has been provided by Liverpool City Council to the USU regarding the organisational structure of Liverpool City Council and the current vacancies. 12. I am of the view that the ability to move this matter forward would be assisted by the attendance of senior personnel for both parties and it is against that background that I make the following recommendation.