Originally Posted by
neville_nobody
If you had followed the story closely, you would have already learned that FWA (probably the President) had already stated that in each case, the judge doing the mediation would not sit on the FWA Full Bench WRT the same union/Qantas case.
I think that's what Keg was saying??
Are you seriously suggesting that having a ex partner of a law firm who is known for anti union activity and who is then advising one of the participants in your case is NOT a conflict of interest??
Like seriously.......
Are you alleging that Vice President Watson is biased and his position in assisting in the bargaining dispute is compromised because of his past employment? He's no longer on any sort of retainer from Freehills.
Does VP Watson have a history of "anti-union" decisions does he?
All members of FWA didn't crawl out from under rocks. They all have "track records" on one side of the divide or other. There are links stretching far and wide. But that is the past