Australia: The Sydney Rail Strike - Why the Fair Work Commission had no choice

Last Updated: 31 January 2018
Article by Brian Powles

As an industrial lawyer, it was probably a mistake logging onto social media on Thursday, in the aftermath of the Fair Work Commission's order in relation to the RTBU strike proposed on the Sydney rail network. Social media in the modern political era is rarely a place for nuanced, informed or intelligent discussion. Rather, it has become a place where people from both sides of politics (there are only two sides by the way) do little more than 'like', 'share' and 'comment' on pieces of web content that conform with their side's view, and to dismiss (or troll) anything that doesn't.

The backlash to DP Hamberger's order was typically fervent. For example, Greens politician Adam Bandt stated: "The right to strike is under threat in Australia. We stand with rail workers who are organising for safe and fair working conditions and better pay [fist emoji]". Mr Bandt's post led to a barrage of commentary, with common references to the 'Unfair Work Commission', a comment describing the Commission as 'Liberal stooges' (which for the record, has not been my experience of appearing before the Fair Work Commission), a comment that the rail workers had been 'spat on' by the Commission, and perhaps my favourite: 'fascist legal controlled by state government is on the rise."

Overall, the message of the commentary seemed to be that the prevention of the strike was yet another example of the 'dystopian capitalist roll-back' currently gripping the societies of the western world. In particular, it appeared as a regular view on Facebook that the legislative power to prevent this industrial action was new, or somehow recently introduced by government. This is plainly wrong, and deserves correction.

It is with some irony that these industrial events centred around the Australia Day weekend. In my view, industrial relations is perhaps the one area of Australian politics of which we can be very proud. By international standards, Australia has always committed to and maintained a genuine balance. From the very early years of Australian political history, we have attempted to craft a system with appropriate harmony and tension between employer and employee interests. Consistent with Aussie informality, we call this 'a fair go all round'. Most notably, the Concilation and Arbitration Act 1904 (Cth), was one of our very earliest, and most important, Commonwealth enactments. Over the subsequent century, maintaining this balance between the employer and employee relationship has been a key part of our legal and political discourse. Three of our most famous and important High Court Cases concerning the scope of Commonwealth power: the Engineers Case, the Boilermakers Case, and the Work Choices Case, have each originated as disputes over employment agreement making. The Coalition have only made one concerted attempt in the modern era to reform industrial relations in a manner which genuinely undermined the power of employees. This effort, in 2005, was the primary cause of the immediate demise of the most dominant Coalition government in modern history, following an ALP landslide in 2007. The modern Coalition, who seem unashamed to deny climate change, lock up infant refugees, and do everything in their power to block marriage equality, have spent over five years in office hedging around industrial relations like it is a poisoned chalice. It is therefore safe to say, that the value of the employment relationship sits at the very heart of our political and social consciousness.

In the United States, liberals often cite the Australian system as a positive example of how substantial employee minimum wage and entitlement provisions can coexist with sustained economic growth. On the other hand, countries such as Greece have demonstrate that uncontained freedom and exercise of industrial action can have broadly detrimental consequences to economic and social well-being. To this end, both 'sides' of politics should remember that we have always (at least in this one area of law) achieved a relatively healthy political compromise.

It is not often that I go out on a limb to defend the Commonwealth executive. But on this occasion, I am happy to be the first to opine that there was nothing controversial about Thursday's order by the Commission. And nothing about it was inconsistent with the similar orders made in the late 1990s or early 2000s, under the equivalent provisions of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Cth). Further, I acknowledge that the Fair Work Commission members are political appointments, and Deputy President Hamberger was appointed to the Commission by a Coalition government, and has an industry, rather than union, background. However, I believe that the decision was non-partisan, and that any one of the many Commissioners or Deputy Presidents appointed from union backgrounds by Bill Shorten during the Rudd / Gillard government would have come to the same or similar result.

The reason for this, is that the rationale for making the order is premised on very narrow grounds, contained in section 424 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). This has been feature of Act for a decade, and the various predecessor legislative instruments for generations. Industrial action has never been 'protected' under Australian Law when it has the capacity to 'threaten the welfare of part of the population', or to cause 'significant damage to the Australian economy or an important part of it'.

The Deputy President held that the strike would threaten the welfare of part of the population, recognising the number of people that rely upon the trains to go about their daily business, and making specific reference to the already congested conditions of Sydney roads, which are dangerous as they are, without thousands of additional cars, busses, and pedestrians.

However, the Deputy President also held that the strike would significantly damage the economy of Sydney. To understand the meaning and importance of this provision, we need to look a little more deeply at the concept of 'the economy.' In the politically polarised world of 'like' and 'share' social media, 'the economy' is generally a code word for interests of the established rich, in particular the interest of 'getting richer'. In the context of an ever-widening equality gap, this often equates to the poor getting poorer. The 'economy' is too often used by the political right in the 'Republican / Trump / trickle down' sense of the word, to scaremonger and justify cruelty or lack of attention to the underprivileged. When striving for social justice therefore, it is very easy, and often justified, to disregard 'the economy' as an irrelevant consideration.

However, 'the economy' in its ordinary sense means a lot more than this, and the Fair Work Commission are correct not to adopt this inflammatory or politically supercharged meaning. The meaning of 'economy', in accordance with the Macquarie Dictionary is:

......... 4. the management, or science of management, of the resources of a community, etc., with a view to productiveness and avoidance of waste: (national economy). 5. the disposition or regulation of the parts or functions of any organic whole; an organised system or method.....

To this end, the 'economy' is not merely the interests of the political right, or of those that own the 'means of production'. It is all of us. Our economy is the sum total of our collective financial interests. This necessarily includes, and is sometimes little more than a collective appreciation for our individual financial interests. The New South Wales Government, may not stand to lose that much from a 24-hour strike, but many people in Sydney do.

To see an example of the potential economic effects of the Sydney rail industrial action, I had to go no further than my office's local station, at St Leonards. On Thursday, during the reduced timetable due to a union overtime ban, the food court was already deserted at lunch time. Most of these businesses are run by self-employed, small operators, paying high rents. The casual employees had been sent home, and the businesses were operating on skeleton staff. These self-employed operators, and their casual employees were out one day's pay, in a week when they had already lost one day's pay to the public holiday. If the strike had gone ahead, this would have been three consecutive business days' pay. The knock-on effects are obvious. For some of these employees, this could be the rent that is due next week, food for their families, or the difference between buying their kids' new school shoes in time for the start of term. Or, perhaps trivial to some, it would mean merely missing out on the few, well deserved, beers they had planned to have on the Australia day weekend. Further up the chain, this equates to less revenue for the grocery store, the shoe store, and the pub.

In many ways, it would be useful to adopt Lord Atkin's famous 'neighbour' principle when we discuss the term 'economy', rather than seeing it as only applying to the interests of the powerful or wealthy companies and individuals that appear to control the economy. When we do so, it takes on a different complexion. While the members of the RTBU may wish to forego a day's pay to secure a 6% rather than 2.7% increase, I don't see why the casual employees at the St Leonards food outlets, nor the self-employed operators, should do so, either voluntarily or otherwise. And these are only the first level 'economic effects' that are visible and obvious, before moving beyond one railway station. When magnified to the entire network, and city, the exponential knock-on effects are obvious. When we assess the broader potential losses to those people relying on the rail network, or those relying on the roads, to make their income, or even just the loss of productivity to those business requiring their employees to attend work, the impact was potentially enormous. Clearly, this proposed strike was never about workers exercising leverage over an employer, it was about workers exercising leverage over an entire community, including other workers, many of whom have no security of income. John Classen, on behalf of the RBTU, issued a media statement on Thursday prior to the order encouraging employers to 'give their employees a day off on Monday'. While to your average full-time office worker, the idea of extending the holiday weekend seems like a pretty neat idea in principle, the costs of this on the economy (in the 'neighbour' sense of the word) would be astronomical. If this this is the union's genuine position on how the strike should have been handled by Sydney employers, it is very hard for the union to then argue that they were not cognisant of the effects of their proposed industrial action on the wider economy. This is the type of leverage expressly prohibited by the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), and there is nothing new about this.

While the very existence of industrial action depends upon economic leverage, a just and balanced society needs mechanisms to determine what leverage is fair to the affected parties who are not involved directly in the specific employment relationship. While workers are entitled to cause or to threaten to cause some economic harm to their employer to forward their own interests (as shown in cases such as BHP Coal Pty Ltd v CFMEU [2001] AIRC, 17 April 2001), we should stop short of allowing unions to leverage wider economic harm against their members' own employment interests.

I am grateful to the train drivers that get me to work every day, and I recognise that they have significant concerns over the way they have been treated. I genuinely hope they ultimately achieve their industrial goals. However, with respect, it just has to happen some other way. Contrary to what you might read on Facebook, the leverage that would have been caused by their proposed strike, has never been a leverage that they were entitled to exercise.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Brian Powles
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions