Good Faith in Collective Bargaining Communications in Australia and New Zealand

By Templer, Leeanne | New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations (Online), January 1, 2012 | Go to article overview

Good Faith in Collective Bargaining Communications in Australia and New Zealand


Templer, Leeanne, New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations (Online)


Abstract

Communications during collective bargaining are of central importance to the conduct of employment relations in Australia and New Zealand as they may substantially impact collective bargaining outcomes. Although communications during collective bargaining are required to be in good faith in both jurisdictions, the Courts have approached communication material that seeks to "negotiate" with or persuade employees of employer viewpoint quite differently. This paper discusses how the Australian courts have allowed greater latitude to employer and employee representatives to communicate their points of view during collective bargaining, and in turn led to results which may be seen as undermining the collective bargaining process.

Introduction

This paper compares the law covering communications during collective bargaining between employers, employees and bargaining representatives in Australia and New Zealand in the context of Good Faith Bargaining (GFB) requirements. Communication issues have assumed greater importance within the systems of enterprise based industrial relations in Australia and New Zealand over the last 20 years. They are integral to any consideration of collective bargaining parameters, and may substantially affect negotiation outcomes.1

Collective bargaining has only recently been concurrently covered by GFB provisions in both jurisdictions.2 Although the current legislation in Australia and in New Zealand was enacted by Labour Governments, there are differences in the respective philosophies underpinning the two Acts. The FanWork (FW) Act is based on individual rights and enterprise collective bargaining3 and does not accord unions any particular status other than as professional bargaining agents like any others. Good faith is just one of many objects of the FW Act, and it contains simple GFB obligations. The New Zealand Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2000, however, promotes collective bargaining, accords unions exclusive status as bargaining representatives and gives good faith as well as GFB a central position in the objects of the legislative framework.4

These different philosophies are shown in the following research to have impacted on the different ways communications that seek to "negotiate" during "good faith" collective bargaining are perceived in each jurisdiction.

The New Zealand Position

The New Zealand government's recent reform of s 32 of the ERA5 is the latest in a series of legislative and judicial attempts to deal with the lack of clarity and relative complexity in the law covering communications during collective bargaining. This reform confirms an employer may communicate with the employer's employees during collective bargaining, including about the employer's proposals for the collective agreement as long as the communication is consistent with the GFB requirements set out in ss 32(l)(d) and 4 of the ERA.

In order to understand the current New Zealand legal position, it is necessary to understand the legal position in respect of communications during collective bargaining under the Employment Contracts Act 1991 (ECA). Section 12(2) was the key section relating to communications in collective bargaining negotiations. This section, which is much less prescriptive than the current ERA, referred to "recognising the authority" of the representatives for negotiations, rather than any direct reference to communications.

Employment Contracts Act Cases

A discussion of the ECA position is facilitated by examining the following four cases, which interpreted ECA s 12(2).

In the first case, Eketone ? Alliance Textiles (NZ) Ltd,6 Cooke P expressed the law as it then stood to be: "[c]ertainly an employer is free not to negotiate with anyone: but if he wishes to negotiate I doubt whether he can bypass an authorised representative".

In the next case, NZ Medical Laboratory Workers ? Capital Coast Health,7 the employer was judged to have crossed the boundary between the provision of legitimate information and attempted direct negotiation by the Employment Court. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Good Faith in Collective Bargaining Communications in Australia and New Zealand
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen
Items saved from this article
  • Highlights & Notes
  • Citations
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Search by... Author
    Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.