Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Favour obligation determines government's position in indistrial dispute



Download PDFDownload PDF

b

PARI LAMENT 01' AUSTRALIA HOUSE Ol- REPKLSFNTAHVHS

PKTER COSTELLO, M.P. FEDERAL MEMBER FOR HKJC1NS SHADOW MINISTER FOR CORPORATE I AW REFORM AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS

PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA, ACT. 2600. SUITE R 2 117 PHONE. (062) 77 4750 FAX (062) 77 2124

20 BEATTY AVENUE, ARMAUAI.K, VIC. 3143 PHONE (03) 822 4422 FAX (03) 822 0319

Favour. Obligation Determine┬╗ flom rnm flirti Pnaltinn In Industrial OiRpntrs.

EMBARGOED UNTIL 2JPM.

"The Hawke Government has a selective morality on labour disputes", Mr Peter Costello, the Shadow Minister for Corporate Law Reform and Consumer Affairs said today whilst addressing a conference on industrial relations at the Darling Harbour Convention and Exhibition Centre.

"Rather than applying a consistent principle to the use of legal action in industrial relations, the Hawke Government is guided by its own interests and the interests of its friends. It decides its position accordingly. There is no consistent principle. Its ambivalent position is the result of shifting alliances for political benefit", said Mr Costello.

Mr Costello said "The Prime Minister as ACTU President led the campaign to break the penal power of the Federal Court during the Clarie O'Shea case in 1969. In its first term the Hawke Government introduced legislation to repeal Section 45D of the Trade Practices Act but was defeated in the Senate. In 1985 Mr Hawke opposed the Dollar Sweets Company taking legal action to end picketing in breach

of wage-fixing principles. In 1986 the Government opposed the Robe River Iron Ore Associates taking legal proceedings to support its historic campaign to improve work practices."

"But by 1989, the Government was supporting the Airlines in taking legal action to halt a wages campaign by the Australian Federation of Airline Pilots".

"The only difference between the Dollar Sweets Case and the Airlines was that the airlines were bigger companies with more power and closer ties with the Government", said Mr Costello.

Mr Costello said T h e Airlines had no more (and no less) entitlement to pursue their legal rights in the Supreme Court of Victoria than did the Dollar Sweets Company, They got the Prime Ministers support. The Dollar Sweets Company earned his opposition*.

Mr Costello called on the Prime Minster to unequivocally support the action of Meat Employers in taking legal proceedings to restrain the Australian Meat Industiy Employees Union in its industrial campaign which has lost millions of export dollars for Australia: "Ties of friendship to the AMIEU have clouded the Prime Minister's position. Since 1989 he has apparently supported the use of legal action against militant unionism. He should m ate it dear this applies to the AMIEU and back the

Meat Employers in the same way he backed Australian and Ansett airlines."

Mr Costello said that the Prime Minister carried great baggage of past favour and obligation in determining his position on industrial disputes.

ENDS 21 March 1991 Contact: Anthony Smith MELBOURNE 03 822 4422 or AH (018) 324 009.