Page 5 - Newsletter#14

Branch Monthly Meetings. Page.2 Gallagher expressed the view that at the May BMM in
Branch Monthly Meetings (BMM’s) provide the
membership with two essential functions, i.e. Monthly
Reports/ information on the industry, and provides the
constructive and necessary engagement of the R&F
members to question and discuss those reports and any
other union issues.
Since the Leadership change in 2019 BMM’s have
been more critical and focused upon Executive decision
making, and important gaps or poor recording of
previous BMM minutes. BMM’s have become
increasingly surrounded by avoidance and vacillation by
officials when R&F members use their legitimate right to
seek answers to decisions already made or in the
making.
The July 2019 BMM was a feisty meeting attended by
over 130 R&F members, demanding answers and
explanations of events surrounding a ‘final warning
letter’, the sacking of the branch manager, and demands
to resolve these matters in a petition presented to the
Branch Secretary.
This was followed by the August 2020 BMM, where the
minutes of the July BMM record were contested, and the
motion approved to hold ‘them in abeyance’ until the
original minute book recording of July could be
compared to those presented during the August BMM.
Minutes went missing on two consecutive BMM’s and
the actual Minute Book was unavailable for presentation
for the October BMM.
Why raise issues about the ‘voluntary physical’
recording of the meeting minutes? The simple answers
to that question are as follows.
1. These are the formal records of what was discussed
and provide a ‘written record’ for those who did not
attend a particular monthly meeting.
2. Properly recorded minutes strengthen the
development and maintenance of strong membership
participation. They also serve as a reference point for
future activity.
3. Without participative debate on issues what then
develops is a view of an ‘inner circle’. This leads to an
apathetic membership, who know little and more
importantly, care less about the union and their part in
it.
Such problems continue to arise in respect of the
conduct of the BMM. During the June BMM concern
was expressed by Assistant Branch Secretary, P
Gallagher that a conversation of his from the May BMM
was quoted verbatim in one of the R&F Newsletters. It
was a quote confirmed by those who attended the May
meeting. It appears that P.Gallagher had been
reprimanded by National Office and under strict orders
not to discuss the issue and by Carol’s lawyers not to
comment.
response to questions raised claimed that his answers
“should stay in the room” He suggested the meeting was
being recorded and finding its way into the public
domain.
He suggested that “if” that was an acceptable outcome
by the meeting, that issues discussed and answered at
BMM’s which find their way into the public domain,” he
then proposed “that branch officers will just give Branch
and National Office reports and make no commentary
What a ridiculous a response and proposition to ‘put to
19 members’ for a decision. Luckily, it wasn’t debated in
General Business and therefore no discussion
eventuated. Such a proposal would squash normal
debate, for the single fear of public exposure.
After National Council overrode the decisions of the Qld
Branch Executive in a recent Appeal review, in its
determination correspondence, it also provided a
document to both the individual member and Officers of
the Qld Branch to read. It is entitled ‘Policy on Mutual
Respect’ guidelines, and on unacceptable behaviour in
particular.
Our assumption is that it was neither read or read
without understanding, particularly given Gallagher’s
persistent interjections over the rulings by the Chair, or
during members right to speak once recognised by the
Chair in questions or discussion on reports.
Parts of the document emphasise the “MUA has both a
legal and moral responsibility to protect its employees
from discrimination and harassment, abuse or similar
unacceptable behaviour”. It alerts Officials and
members not to ‘dominate the conversation and
everyone has a right to share their views’. This policy
recommends that all officers of the union provide and
follow these guidelines, along with members, and
“should be included as part of the documentation for all
future MUA meetings”.
Equally, constructive debate on the accuracy of the
minutes is desired for a correct recording and conduct
of the meeting. Members and officials need to be more
aware of how to conduct themselves, along the lines of
the earlier proposed meeting procedure delivered some
time back.
MAKING A VIRTUE OUT OF A NECESSITY, the
resurrection of Christy Cain within the MUA!
It wasn’t so long ago that Christy Cain indicated his
intention to stand for the vacancy caused by the forced
resignation of Michael O’Connor, from the position of
National Secretary of the CFMMEU.
Christy said he was resigning from his positions within
the MUA Division, because of the “conflict of interest”
arising from holding both divisional and national
responsibilities, as had occurred in the case of his
predecessor.