Page 1490 - Week 05 - Thursday, 12 May 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries: You are reading that so well, David.
MR LAMONT: Yes. I wanted to make sure that I had the lesson well prepared for Mr De Domenico, in small words that he could understand. In effect there is no difference, Mr Deputy Speaker, from the previous situation whereby preference arrangements and awards could exclude the operation of the Discrimination Act in respect of union membership. Preference arrangements in enterprise agreements will have similar operation and cannot be regarded as unlawful under the Discrimination Act. Have you got that?
Mr De Domenico: What does that part mean?
MR LAMONT: Where preference arrangements are provided for union members in awards or certified agreements, there is no basis for complaint under the Discrimination Act, and the arrangements could not be considered unlawful. Have you got that?
Mr De Domenico: Oh! Is it right for people to be refused entry for not having a ticket?
MR LAMONT: Preference for union members under some circumstances has always been an important part of the Australian industrial relations system. I will repeat that for the sake of Mr De Domenico, Mr Deputy Speaker; I know that you are taking notice of this. Preference for union members under some circumstances has always been an important part of the Australian industrial relations system. Unions historically have played an important part in developing and maintaining the working conditions of their members, and governments of all political perspectives have recognised this important role. In the private sector particularly, many employers have recognised a significant role for unions and have entered into membership agreements covering all their employees. Even in the recent enterprise agreement negotiated by a Canberra employer, the relevant trade union played a recognised positive role. In the complex and sometimes confrontationist world of industrial relations, unions have often played a stabilising role in channelling the sometimes confused and conflicting aims of workers, and wise employers have recognised this to their advantage. This is the legal framework within which industrial relations in the Territory are regulated, and it applies equally in the private and public sectors.
In relation to its own work force, as I said earlier today in responding to Mr Kaine, this Government has a policy of encouraging unionism and union membership in public sector employment. This is not a policy of compulsory unionism. In public sector employment there are no awards or policies of the Government which require compulsory unionism in any form, including for the purposes of engagement in employment.
Mr De Domenico: What about the firefighters award?
MR LAMONT: This is the historical situation with Commonwealth employment and ACT Government employment, where longstanding policies and practices have recognised and encouraged the proper role of unions and the advantages of union membership. Again there is a squeak, an interjection, "What about the fire brigade?".
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .