Current Law In Australia Case Study
Consider whether the current law in Australia in relation to pickets is too harsh.
Introduction
The power dynamic within employment relationships has a direct bearing, and often can be decisive in the outcomes of industrial disputes. Indeed, the ability of employees to effectively negotiate agreeable working conditions is dependent upon their actual or perceived ability to withdraw their labour. A powerful form of industrial protest available to employees and trade unions is the picket line. This essay aims to discuss the legal treatment of picketing under the current law in Australia and the range of relief options available for employers. Further, it will examine the whether the law should move beyond a merely formal recognition of workers’ …show more content…
She argues that with other forms of industrial action, the employer is technically able protect itself by employing other resources. Further, she contends that if tortuous picketing received protected status, it would be possible for a union to organise a total blockade of premises preventing the employer from any trade at all. While it is foreseeable that protection for such action would exceed the level of persuasive pressure anticipated by Parliament, it is this author’s opinion that Willis’ assertion fails to take into account the varying intensities and categories of picketing. Indeed, while Davids is the leading case in this area, it appears that it has not been strictly applied in the subsequent case Transfield Construction v AMWU (‘Transfield’). In Transfield, Merkel J held that where the picket line has been established for the purpose of preventing and deterring employees from carrying out the work, it would fall under the ambit of ‘industrial action’, and thus subject to court orders. This decision suggests that contrary to Willis’ argument, there is no need to grant tortious picketing protected status as there exists, categories of behaviour that sit between the two extremes identified by Davids ; categories which can, in turn, be identified as ‘industrial …show more content…
Employing this classification, it would appear that picketing would fall under this right. In the Northern Territory, Western Australia and New South Wales however, even a peaceful picket line could potentially constitute the criminal offence of ‘unlawful assembly’. This is clearly at odds with the ILO standards, particularly where peaceful picketing is undertaken by workers to protect their social or economic interests. Nonetheless, insofar as international treaties are not ratified and by extension, extended to domestic legislation, Australian workers will have to rely on the parameters of the FW Act and limit industrial action to a last
Introduction
The power dynamic within employment relationships has a direct bearing, and often can be decisive in the outcomes of industrial disputes. Indeed, the ability of employees to effectively negotiate agreeable working conditions is dependent upon their actual or perceived ability to withdraw their labour. A powerful form of industrial protest available to employees and trade unions is the picket line. This essay aims to discuss the legal treatment of picketing under the current law in Australia and the range of relief options available for employers. Further, it will examine the whether the law should move beyond a merely formal recognition of workers’ …show more content…
She argues that with other forms of industrial action, the employer is technically able protect itself by employing other resources. Further, she contends that if tortuous picketing received protected status, it would be possible for a union to organise a total blockade of premises preventing the employer from any trade at all. While it is foreseeable that protection for such action would exceed the level of persuasive pressure anticipated by Parliament, it is this author’s opinion that Willis’ assertion fails to take into account the varying intensities and categories of picketing. Indeed, while Davids is the leading case in this area, it appears that it has not been strictly applied in the subsequent case Transfield Construction v AMWU (‘Transfield’). In Transfield, Merkel J held that where the picket line has been established for the purpose of preventing and deterring employees from carrying out the work, it would fall under the ambit of ‘industrial action’, and thus subject to court orders. This decision suggests that contrary to Willis’ argument, there is no need to grant tortious picketing protected status as there exists, categories of behaviour that sit between the two extremes identified by Davids ; categories which can, in turn, be identified as ‘industrial …show more content…
Employing this classification, it would appear that picketing would fall under this right. In the Northern Territory, Western Australia and New South Wales however, even a peaceful picket line could potentially constitute the criminal offence of ‘unlawful assembly’. This is clearly at odds with the ILO standards, particularly where peaceful picketing is undertaken by workers to protect their social or economic interests. Nonetheless, insofar as international treaties are not ratified and by extension, extended to domestic legislation, Australian workers will have to rely on the parameters of the FW Act and limit industrial action to a last