State drops ‘bullying’ probe into industrial court judge

The Queensland government has dropped an inquiry into industrial umpire Dianne Lin­nane and will not prosecute her.

The Queensland government has quietly dropped its controversial inquiry into allegations of bullying against high-paid senior industrial umpire Dianne Lin­nane and will not prosecute her.

As revealed by The Australian, Office of Industrial Relations deputy director-general Simon Blackwood secretly ordered an investigation last year into allegations the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission vice-president bullied then-pregnant fellow commissioner Minna Knight and others at the state body charged with resolving workplace disputes.

But Ms Linnane — who was appointed to the court in 1999, is paid an annual base salary of ­almost $400,000 and has tenure until she is 70 — challenged the Palaszczuk government’s inquiry in the Supreme Court, alleging it breached the separation of powers.

Now, after “careful consideration and legal advice”, Dr Blackwood has “decided not to prosecute anyone under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011, or take any other formal regulatory action”.

“However, (investigator Bar­ry) Sherriff’s investigation did identify that improvements could be made to work health and safety systems designed to prevent bullying at the QIRC,” a spokesman for Dr Blackwood said. He said the commission had been told and “indicated it will take action to ensure that appropriate systems are in place”.

However, commission president and Supreme Court judge Glenn Martin said he had not seen Mr Sherriff’s report.

But, in accordance with Labor’s overhaul of the Industrial Relations Act passed late last year, Justice Martin said he was developing a code of conduct for “members of the commission and persons appearing before the commission” that will include anti-bullying rules.

Industrial Relations Minister Grace Grace said she was confident the investigation had been thorough and independent.

Ms Linnane has denied any wrongdoing and did not respond to requests for comment from The Australian. Earlier this year, her solicitor, Glen Cranny, said she had taken the ­Supreme Court action to clarify her position in light of the investigation by Mr Sherriff.

“Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, there are serious questions about whether the government may inquire into actions taken by her in exercising her functions of administering the commission and whether it would be proper for her to disclose such things,” Mr Cranny said at the time.

Under state law, the only way to remove a judicial officer before the official retirement age of 70 is for the governor to order the removal after a vote of parliament for “mental or physical ­incapacity” or “misbehaviour”.