Page 1481 - Week 05 - Thursday, 12 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS PRACTICES
Discussion of Matter of Public Importance
MADAM SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Mr De Domenico proposing that a matter of public importance be submitted to the Assembly for discussion, namely:
The need to condemn any industrial relations practices which discriminate against any sector of the work force.
MR DE DOMENICO (3.11): May I say how timely was Mr Lamont's indication to this Assembly that the Government obviously would be very concerned if there was any discrimination against members of the work force over membership or non-membership of unions or industry associations, in line with Mr Moore's amendment to the Discrimination Act last year. It is well known that 50 per cent of the Australian work force are not union members, and the percentage is rising, and that 71 per cent of employees in the private sector are not union members. We are also aware that the previous Minister for Industrial Relations was obsessed with unions and that he ignored about 50 per cent or more of the work force in the ACT who are not members of unions.
One needs to remember that industrial relations commands the business of employment. It also commands the tragedy of unemployment. You cannot govern industrial relations without affecting the employment and unemployment situation. The first instance that I need to talk about concerns a courier who was sent to Woden Valley Hospital, the redevelopment site, on Friday, 26 November 1993, and was refused access. In fact it went a bit further because there was a demand by union organisers to see the contractor's union card. The contractor was told that the Woden Valley Hospital site was a ticket only site and, if he could not produce a ticket, to leave immediately. The courier was unable to proceed and to do his job. I am advised that two union officials declared that the site was a union site and that if the courier was not a union member he was unable to proceed. It would be interesting to see what action the current Minister would be prepared to take, should that sort of situation occur again. I wrote to the then Industrial Relations Minister, Mr Berry.
Mr Lamont: So you have had all this aired before. You just want to rehash it now?
MR DE DOMENICO: I wrote to Mr Berry. I think members should listen.
Mr Humphries: I know that it is painful, but you have to listen to this.
MR DE DOMENICO: It is very painful. I wrote to Mr Berry on 30 November, a couple of days after this happened. He wrote back to me some two weeks later. That shows how concerned he was about the whole thing. In that letter he said:
Thank you for your recent letter concerning an alleged breach of the Discrimination (Amendment) Act 1993.
As this matter falls under the portfolio responsibilities of my colleague, Mr Terry Connolly, the Attorney-General, I have referred the matter to him.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .