A Second international Embarrassment:
IR Act Found in Breach of International Convention

Hard on the heels of a UN report which found the Federal Government's 
Native Title legislation discriminatory, the International Labour 
Organisation (ILO) has found the Howard Government's Federal Workplace 
Relations Act to be in breach of international treaty obligations on 
workers' rights.

The ILO's committee of expert jurists found that the legislation breaches 
UN Convention No. 87, the Freedom of Association and Protection of the 
Right to Organise.

The committee found that both the Workplace Relations Act and the secondary 
boycott provisions of the Trade Practices Act should be amended.

The ILO decision was taken despite a copious submission from the Federal 
Government in defence of the legislation, and despite the Government having 
a "second bite at the cherry", i.e. a second submission in reply to a case 
presented by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU).

In particular, the ILO committee found that under the Australian 
legislation, in contravention of Convention No. 87: 

1. workers are not able to strike on an industry or multi-employer basis in 
support of economic or social issues;

2. workers cannot take legal action in support of fellow unionists (the 
committee said that sympathy strikes should be legal where the original 
action is legal, and that 

3. protected (or legal) action can be terminated if the (Industrial 
Relations) Commission believes it is damaging the economy, which goes 
beyond the ILO-permitted exemption for essential services.

Regarding the ILO finding, ACTU President Jennie George commented that 
Workplace Relations Minister "Reith has said that Australia will keep its 
international obligations.

"If the legislation is not amended, he will be showing once again that he 
cannot be trusted."

Democrat Senator Andrew Murray has spoken in favour of including reference 
to Australia's international treaty obligations in the Workplace Relations 
Act. Senator Murray stated recently that "If Australia is to hold its head 
high as a defender of human rights it must ensure that it practices what it 
preaches. Labour rights are human rights ... workers are a part of the 
human rights movement ..."

Despite his previous trumpetting on human rights, Prime Minister Howard has 
been remarkably silent about this aspect of the subject.

Howard has previously spoken about amending the United Declaration of Human 
Rights, parts of which he declared to be outmoded. He may have in mind that 
part of the Declaration which describes employment itself to be a basic 
human right.