A Quick Overview

On 1 January 2023, a union’s right to enter a Local Government workplace became governed by the Industrial Relations Act 1979 (WA) (the Act). Under the Act, unions enjoy a much broader right to enter into a Local Government to hold discussions than they did under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Under section 49H:

• A union official with an entry permit may enter, during working hours, any premises where relevant employees work, for the purpose of holding discussions at the premises with any of the relevant employees who wish to participate in those discussions.
• the union official must give at least 24 hours’ written notice.

Section 49J(5) states that a union official’s right of entry permit may be suspended or revoked if they have:

• Acted in an improper manner; or
• Intentionally and unduly hindered an employer or employees.

In addition, union right of entry may be limited or restricted if the union’s visit would raise genuine safety concerns.

Tribunal dismisses International Soccer Star’s allegations of ‘Indirect Discrimination’

A Tribunal has found that the Football Federation of Australia (the Football Federation) did not discriminate against an elite member of the Australian women’s soccer team (the Matildas) after she was required to pay childcare costs associated with a Matildas tour to the USA.  The women’s soccer star was paid approximately $2,440 for the tour and her childcare costs were estimated at double that amount.

The soccer star argued that the Football Federation’s decision to not reimburse the child care costs amounted to ‘indirect discrimination’. However, the Tribunal found that although the Football Federation was ‘mean spirited’ and ‘inflexible’, its conduct was not a technical breach of ‘indirect discrimination’ provisions under the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 (which are generally mirrored in the WA Equal Opportunities Act 1984).

How ‘Indirect Discrimination’ Works

Under anti-discrimination legislation, a perpetrator engages in ‘indirect discrimination’ against an aggrieved person if, on the grounds of the aggrieved person’s responsibilities as a carer, the perpetrator requires the aggrieved person to comply with a requirement or condition with which a substantially higher proportion of persons who do not have such responsibilities comply or are able to comply.