Left2primary
IT WOULD BE UNLAWFULL FOR QANTAS TO LOCK OUT FAs DURING A STRIKE AS THEY WILL BE TAKING PROTECTED INDUSTRIAL ACTION.
With great respect, you are mistaken or misled.
You may take ‘Protected Industrial Action’ when;
• it happens during a properly notified bargaining period (which starts seven days after one party notifies the other and the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) that it intends to seek to reach a certified agreement);
• there has been a genuine attempt to reach agreement before the action is taken; and
• your union gives 3 (three) working days’ written notice of the proposed industrial action.
If an employer is bargaining with employees and unable to reach agreement, it can apply to the AIRC to suspend or terminate the bargaining period. If it is successful, that puts an end to the protected status of the industrial action.
An employer may also seek an injunction or interim injunction from the Federal Court.
Separately, an employer can commence civil proceedings in relation to tortious conduct by a union, its officers or members after a certificate is obtained from the Commission.
An employer can ‘lock out’ workers and stop them from working if:
• the lockout occurs during a properly notified bargaining period;
• there has been a genuine attempt to reach agreement; and
• it gives written notice to each party with whom it is negotiating – so if there is more than one union involved it must give the notice to each union – that it will be locking the gate/telling them to go home. It must give 3 clear working days notice unless the lock out is in response to the union/s industrial action.
The Courts have interpreted ‘industrial action’ in broad terms. Essentially, it’s when employees do something which restricts, limits or delays their work, such as imposing go-slows, picket lines or work to rule bans –not only when they walk off the job.
IMH experience, it’s not worth starting a ‘fight’ you can’t win. QF management is indicating clearly that it will play ‘hard ball’ on this issue. I take that to mean recourse to the Courts if necessary, to play out a scenario not dissimilar to the Waterfront Dispute. That’s not to say the union can’t vigorously advance its point of view. But, as
galley_gossiper points out, in this dispute, the union doesn’t have a strong hand. So the current posturing, as reflected in some of the contributions to this thread, serves only to try and galvanize the troops to give some semblance to union unity.
The practice of Industrial Relations has been likened to ballroom dancing – each side knows, or ought to know the steps. All industrial disputes are settled eventually, even those where industrial action is taken. After settlement, both QF and the Union will still be there, and have to continue to work with each other. Before setting out on the road to Armageddon, it would be prudent to keep this thought in mind. Far better to know "when to fold", and live to fight another day, than to go down in flames and have the union decimated.
Also, while threatening fire and brimstone may win over some of the membership, it also serves to alienate the more moderate elements of the union. An astute union official would be aware of the risk of fracturing their support base; and pitch their agenda (overt and covert) accordingly. As elected officers, their jobs are on the line too. A relevant question to ask would be: "Would the strike motion get up in a secret ballot"?
I wouldn't place any trust in politicians, either. If John Howard wins next Saturday, then the only changes to existing industrial legislation will be to favour small business. If Mark Latham wins, then he won't have time to get any legislative change through the Parliament, even if he's so inclined, before the New Year.
And, before anybody seeks to vilify me, no, I am not connected with Qantas in any way. I have never applied to work or worked for Qantas or any other airline. I do not own Qantas or any other airline shares. I’m just a regular punter who wants value for money when choosing a carrier to fly with. Sadly, that hasn't been Qantas for quite a while. But that's a topic for discussion elsewhere.