Fair Work Court: Albanese Government warned judges must be independent

Businesses have warned the Albanese Government against moves to stack its new Fair Work Court, saying judges must be independent and appointed on merit to ensure its integrity.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese unveiled plans for the return of the court at Labor’s national conference in Adelaide on Thursday, saying it would operate alongside the Fair Work Commission and be headed by expert judges in the field.

“It will resolve disputes faster and at lower costs for both workers and employers,” Mr Albanese told the conference.

“Good for workers, good for businesses, good for the country and we’re going to do that.”

It will be the first Federal industrial relations court since a previous one was abolished by the Howard government in 1997.

But its return has been met with caution by the business community.

The Business Council of Australia said it had the potential to add yet another layer of process without any real practical benefit and warned it should not be seen as a “substitute” for fixing the complexity of controversial industrial relations reforms already introduced by the Government.

“Instead of adding another layer of red tape, we need to make the system simpler to understand for both employees and employers,” a BCA spokesman said.

“For a small business, a case that costs more than it’s worth is not only unfair, it can be the difference between staying open or closing its doors.

“We support faster, simpler and more affordable workplace resolutions.”

The BCA also issued a warning over the Government’s choice of judges, saying they “must be appointed on merit, independent and impartial so that both workers and employers can trust that it is fair”.

How the court will interact with the Fair Work Commission or who would serve on the body are yet to be decided.

Workplace Minister Amanda Rishworth said she envisaged underpayment matters would go to the court for resolution, as well as bargaining matters.

“There is a lot of work to get right, but I think what we’ve outlined is not just an idea; it is a concrete proposal that we will take forward,” she said.

“We want to see a very specialised expertise sitting in the Fair Work Court, so that they can effectively deal with enforcing the rights of workers.”

But the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry also raised a red flag over the potential cost burden and add complexity.

Chief executive Andrew McKellar said the chamber backed the abolition of the previous court because it duplicated existing jurisdictions, adding there was no evidence that existing courts lack the expertise or jurisdiction required to deal with industrial relations matters.

“One of the benefits of the existing system is that it helps reinforce the principles that workplace litigation should be focused on legal questions rather than political contests,” Mr McKellar said.

“A specialist industrial court also opens the door for the adoption of legal doctrines to be made by an isolated jurisdiction detached from broader principles of commercial, administrative, constitutional and statutory law.”

He also echoed the BCA’s concerns the court was a necessary result of industrial relations complexity.

“Changes to workplace relations laws over the last few years have vastly increased complexity and uncertainty, and expanded their coverage and jurisdiction, resulting in more litigation and a greater role for courts and tribunals in resolving workplace disputes,” he said.

“Business has always been concerned that this would result in a lawyer’s picnic. The announcement may be evidence that we were right.”