The ACTU has proposed (p.65) that representation orders under s 137A of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 be abolished, and has highlighted the decision of FWA in Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association v National Union of Workers [2012] FWAFB 461 in support of the view that such orders are unlikely to be granted’. ‘highly In Ai Group’s February 2012 submission, Ai Group expressed the following relevant views: rights were expanded markedly under the FW Act and the ‘…entry Government introduced a system of representational orders to address demarcation problems which arose. These orders have not proved to be very useful in practice: see Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association v National Union of Workers [2012] FWAFB 461. To reduce the risk of demarcation disputes, a union should only have the right to enter a workplace where an enterprise agreement applies, to have discussions with employees, if the union is covered by the agreement. This was the situation which applied under the Workplace Relations Act 1996.’ The proposed amendment in the above extract should be implemented regardless of whether or not representation orders are maintained. pART 3-6 OTHER RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES – Employee records and the Privacy Act The Australian Privacy Commissioner has made a submission which urges the Panel to recommend the revocation of the employee records exemption in the Privacy Act 1988. Clearly such a recommendation would be beyond the terms of reference for the FW Act Review. If the Panel decides to make a recommendation about this matter is should recommend that the employee records exemption in the Privacy Act 1988 be maintained. The employee records exemption was implemented for very valid reasons and should not be altered. In an employment relationship, an individual’s right to privacy needs to be balanced against their employer’s need to keep and utilise records for a wide range of legitimate business purposes, including: The efficient operation of the business;
The ACTU has proposed (p.65) that representation orders under s 137A of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 be abolished, and has highlighted the decision of FWA in Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association v National Union of Workers [2012] FWAFB 461 in support of the view that such orders are ‘highly unlikely to be granted’. In Ai Group’s February 2012 submission, Ai Group expressed the following relevant views: ‘…entry rights were expanded markedly under the FW Act and the Government introduced a system of representational orders to address demarcation problems which arose. These orders have not proved to be very useful in practice: see Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association v National Union of Workers [2012] FWAFB 461. To reduce the risk of demarcation disputes, a union should only have the right to enter a workplace where an enterprise agreement applies, to have discussions with employees, if the union is covered by the agreement. This was the situation which applied under the Workplace Relations Act 1996.’ The proposed amendment in the above extract should be implemented regardless of whether or not representation orders are maintained. pART 3-6 – OTHER RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Employee records and the Privacy Act The Australian Privacy Commissioner has made a submission which urges the Panel to recommend the revocation of the employee records exemption in the Privacy Act 1988. Clearly such a recommendation would be beyond the terms of reference for the FW Act Review. If the Panel decides to make a recommendation about this matter is should recommend that the employee records exemption in the Privacy Act 1988 be maintained. The employee records exemption was implemented for very valid reasons and should not be altered. In an employment relationship, an individual’s right to privacy needs to be balanced against their employer’s need to keep and utilise records for a wide range of legitimate business purposes, including: The efficient operation of the business;