former Queensland secretary Michael Ravbar – who’s been dismissed together with almost all other officials – said he would launch a challenge against the legislation passed last week to put the union into administration.

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The High Court action is likely to argue the Commonwealth lacked the authority to take over a democratically organised union and sack nearly 300 officials, who had not been convicted of any offence. No court was involved in the action. Earlier court proceedings that were underway, brought by the Fair Work Commission’s general manager, are set to be discontinued after the government’s action.

If Labor has got this wrong by acting too hastily, then this could sink them. If they're found to have fired 300 officials with no just cause then thats such an own goal. Also heavy hand of the state coming down on the unions, but we're a light touch for the PWC tax scandal?

Has anyone gone to jail for that yet? Sure private company, probably can't fire them, although i don't understand how they've been able to fire people from a union.

[–] zero_gravitas@aussie.zone 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

If they’re found to have fired 300 officials with no just cause then thats such an own goal.

I honestly don't think that's even in dispute at this point. The administrator didn't conduct (and couldn't have had time to conduct) any official investigation and no finding has been made against any individual.

The only thing at issue in this legal challenge is whether the Aus Fed Govt has the authority to seize control of a member organisation and terminate its employees without just cause.

[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah, okay, so that answers the last part of my comment a little more as well. I wondered why the Fed gov had the ability to reach into a separate organisation, turns out thats very much up for debate whether they really do.

I've come late to this story, so i guess that was what all the rushing of legislation through the parliament was for in the last few weeks.

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

There's a point made about how no courts were involved in the action. In wonder if the High Court has a pragmatic interest in stopping this kind of summary action. If the courts can be bypassed, what power will they have?

[–] brisk@aussie.zone 1 points 2 months ago

IMO this seemed like it may have influenced the decision making when the courts banned indefinite detention