Session Catalogue

Screenshot 2020-10-06 114405

Industrial Action – Compliance with orders and the need for it to have an industrial character


The speakers in this seminar address two key issues that have emerged in the law about how the Fair Work Act 2009 conceives of “industrial action” and when action of that kind might be denied legal protection.


One-off purchase of a single session, buy 3 for $199.00.


Annual membership, access to the full CPD session catalogue.


Full Description

From Union T Shirts to Blue Flue to attendance at a rally.  The first topic of this seminar address the requirement that “industrial action” have an industrial character or purpose by reference to Communications, Electrical, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Laing (1998) 89 FCR 17,  Automotive, Food Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union v The Age Company Ltd [2004] AIRC 1254 and CFMEU v BHP Coal [2015] FCAFC 25.

The second topic address the consequences that arise under s. 413(5) of the Fair Work Act 2009 if a party who is organising industrial action has failed to comply with an order and the options available to attempt to remedy such non-compliance. The discussion will address the High Court’s view of the section in Esso Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Workers’ Union (2017) 263 CLR 551 and the nunc pro tunc revocation remedy discussed in that case, including by reference to what was said recently on that subject by a Full Federal Court in Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union v Metro Trains Melbourne Pty Ltd [2020] FCAFC 81.


The following individuals appear in this session. You can click through to view their profile or to browse the other sessions they have participated in.