Page 4 - Newsletter#13 2021
P. 4
The rank & file newsletter focused on Qld branch and
national MUA policy & direction. Unfortunately, Mr Gallagher has a bad habit of opening
Edition #13 June 25 2021 his mouth before putting his brain into gear. He should
discuss the matter with the National Legal Director, and
he will be informed the interests of himself, and Jason
National Council decides on member’s appeal Miners was actually protected by the decision of
against charges laid by Qld Branch Secretary National Council.
National Council recently issued its decision concerning The alternative would have been to uphold the appeal,
Mike Barber’s appeal against an earlier majority in acknowledgement of the Branch Executive by
decision of the Qld Branch Executive to find him guilty majority decision, acting unlawfully in finding Mike
in respect of 5 of 8 charges laid against him by the Qld Barber guilty thus adversely impacting on the good
Branch Secretary in December 2020. name of the MUA.
National Council has not ruled on Mike’s appeal. It has The concern of National Council, (on the
exercised a discretion purportedly given to it under Rule recommendation of Padraig), was the primary
15 to review the disputed matters afresh, set aside the importance of preserving the good name of the
decision of the Branch Executive and replace that, with organisation, no different from the approach adopted by
its own. the Catholic Church in dealing with paedophilia within its
ranks. Protecting the good name of the church was
National Council dismissed 2 of the remaining five more important than ensuring justice for its victims.
charges. As a result, 5 of the 8 charges laid by the
Branch Secretary have now been dismissed, with 3 Nevertheless, the actions of the Branch Secretary in the
being upheld. National Council also determined not to first instance and later, the majority opinion within the
impose any penalty, overturning the 3 months Branch Executive has to a very large degree, been
suspension imposed by a majority of the Branch repudiated by National Council. As a result, there’ll be
Executive earlier. no further rush by any branch official to charge members
in the future nor will they be encouraged to do so.
These charges arose from various postings made to
Mike Barber’s Face Book page, which were said to Further, the conduct of Messrs Cumberlidge, Miners
include baseless claims against the Branch Secretary or and Gallagher in this matter has now been shown for
branch officials generally and therefore Mike was guilty what it was, ill considered, incompetent, and at worst,
of abusive and/or insulting conduct towards those nothing less than an abuse of authority, although we
concerned, this being in breach of Rule 58 – Charges step back from describing it as a gross abuse of
and Discipline. authority, just! There’s still a question as to whether
National Council was lawfully entitled to act in the way it
If found guilty on all charges, this could have affected has done in this matter.
Mike’s employment rights, he could have been
suspended or expelled from the union or faced fines in While it does have a general discretion to settle
excess of $300. Importantly, there would have been differences between branches and their members, or
irreparable damage to his reputation from amongst MUA set aside, or rescind decisions of a Branch Executive,
members and other unionists across Australia. For National Council may only deal with an appeal brought
some, this would have meant nought. For Mike pursuant to Rule 58 in accordance with the provisions
however, it would have signified a total repudiation of a mandated (within that rule) and not otherwise.
lifetime’s political and industrial commitment to the
cause of labour. Our view is that the Federal Court on review would
effectively set aside this decision of the National Council
We were first alerted to the forthcoming decision by this and order the matter to be dealt with in accordance with
attached outburst a day beforehand, from Assistant Rule 58 as described above. There is a strong, almost
Branch Secretary Paul Gallagher. We gather Mr compelling argument in favour of this view, and we have
Gallagher wasn’t particularly impressed with National no doubt Padraig at least, was advised of this by those
Council’s decision. Page.1 who provided the legal opinion to him. No competent
legal practitioner could fail to say otherwise.