Opinion: Freedom of association no longer guaranteed in Qld

New laws curtailing independent unions could be in breach of international laws protecting freedom of association, writes Des Houghton.

Industrial Relations Minister Grace Grace. Picture: Liam Kidston

Do the new laws in Queensland that curtail independent unions breach International Labour Organisation articles that guarantee freedom of association?

I suspect so, although it is a complex area of the law with many twists and turns.

The ILO is a UN agency that states explicitly that workers’ groups should be allowed to form organisations without government interference.

“Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and … join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation,” says the ILO freedom of association charter.

“Workers’ and employers’ organisations shall have the right to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration.”

The Queensland government has clearly tinkered with those rights, in my opinion.

A Labor government that sees unions as enemies? Who would have thought?

The ILO charter adds: “Public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede their lawful exercise.”

Recent changes to industrial laws in Queensland strengthened the Labor-aligned unions that fund the Labor Party and made it difficult for independent or “rogue” unions to represent their members.

This seems to me to be against the spirit of the ILO conventions that say unions cannot “be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority”.

I believe the state government has improperly muzzled independent unions that offer cheaper fees while refusing to be linked to the ALP. There will be blowback.

Australia is a founding member of the ILO and, along with 187 nations and labor organisations, has signed dozens of conventions guaranteeing workers’ rights.

Margaret Gilbert

Have teachers’ and nurses’ rights been trampled by the new laws that seek to stop the so-called “fake unions” from representing their members at the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission?

Has the Labor government conveniently ignored ILO conventions? It looks suspicious to me. Parliament heard the new laws were designed to punish independent unions like the NPAQ (Nurses’ Professional Association of Queensland) and the TPAQ (Teachers’ Professional Association of Queensland) who are members of RUSH (Red Union Support Hub).

Why? They will not kowtow to the Labor Party and every time they sign a new member, they take money from Labor Party pockets.

In Parliament, the Opposition questioned the independence of the QIRC.

The Supreme Court has now become ensnared in the political controversy.

Chief Justice Helen Bowskill has received a letter from an appellant asking whether the president of the QIRC, Justice Peter Davis, should abstain from sitting on her case.

In his submission to Parliament Davis discusses the Red Union Support Hub, the NPAQ and the TPAQ, who he said had featured in a promotional video.

Margaret Gilbert, president of the independent NPAQ, wrote to Bowskill and told her she had not received a response to a letter she wrote to Davis in October asking that he step down from deliberating on a separate case involving her.

The appeal was heard in November 2021 but a judgment has yet to be handed down.

In the letter, Gilbert repeated her request that Davis recuse himself, or step aside.

“I respectfully request that you make an inquiry with the Industrial Court about what is happening with my case,” Gilbert wrote.

“Both myself and my members still feel it appropriate in the circumstances that Justice Davis recuse himself and a new judge be appointed promptly.”

Justice Peter Davis

Gilbert also raised Davis’ historical political links with the ALP and revelations in Parliament of Davis’ role in the campaigning for the ALP’s Peter Russo, a fellow lawyer, in the seat of Toohey at the last election before Davis was made a judge.

During the October debate in Parliament, Labor members including Industrial Relations Minister Grace Grace praised Davis’s submission in the House.

Opposition members led by shadow Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie, and Member for Southern Downs James Lister, told Parliament that the Labor Party changed the industrial relations laws to favour its own unions.

Lister was especially blunt.

“It is clear that there is a massive opportunity for patronage here and for jobs for the friends of the union movement, which obviously is a payback from the government for funding its election campaigns and for giving them their jobs,” Lister said.

“This is sheer and utter corruption. This bill is a disgrace.”

He added: “Union payback is at the essence of this Bill. I have spoken about this beautifully symmetrical love triangle with big ALP, including the parliamentary wing, big unions and the Industrial Relations Commission which work together in a way that can hardly be seen as truly independent.”

Bleijie told the House there are hundreds of thousands of teachers and nurses who will pay more in fees if the independent unions are crushed.

Chief Justice Bowskill declined to say yesterday whether she had responded to the call by the NPAQ for Davis to recuse himself.

The controversy lingers. Beneath the surface a political and legal volcano is set to explode.

Meanwhile, no one in Opposition questioned whether the new laws breached the ILO conventions. Perhaps they should.

Note: A Queensland Courts spokesman said Justice Bowskill received a letter from Ms Gilbert on November 28, and responded on that same date.

“The response advised that, as the Industrial Court is a separate and completely independent Court from the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice was not able to assist Ms Gilbert with her enquiry,” the spokesman said.