Industrial Peace Act (No. 2) 1920

Overview

The Industrial Peace Act (No. 2) 1920 was enacted to amend Section Fourteen of the Industrial Peace Act 1920. This legislation was introduced to address the need for a more structured and decisive process in decision-making by Special Tribunals, particularly in scenarios where the tribunal members are equally divided. Enacted by the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, the policy objective of the Act was to ensure that tribunals could effectively reach decisions in industrial disputes by establishing a majority rule and defining a quorum requirement. The Act aimed to enhance the efficiency and fairness of the dispute resolution process within the framework of industrial peace.

Scope and Application

The Industrial Peace (No. 2) Act 1920 amends Section Fourteen of the Industrial Peace Act 1920 to introduce specific rules for decision-making within a Special Tribunal. This Act applies to the Special Tribunals established under the Industrial Peace Acts 1920, affecting the manner in which these tribunals make decisions, particularly in cases of a tie. The amendment mandates that the opinion of the majority shall prevail in such meetings, with the Chairman's opinion taking precedence if the tribunal members are equally divided. Additionally, it sets the quorum for these meetings at two-thirds of the members. Geographically, this Act applies at the Commonwealth level, impacting any Special Tribunals formed under the Industrial Peace Acts 1920 across Australia. There are no stated exclusions, exemptions, or thresholds specified in the Act, but the application may be further extended or restricted through subordinate instruments that could detail specific industries or types of disputes the Special Tribunals are authorised to handle.

Key Provisions

The Industrial Peace Act (No. 2) 1920 primarily amends Section Fourteen of the Industrial Peace Act 1920, introducing new provisions concerning the constitution and decision-making processes of the Special Tribunal (section 2). The Act stipulates that at meetings of the Special Tribunal, the opinion of the majority shall prevail (section 2(3)). In the event of an equal division of opinion among the members present, the opinion of the Chairman shall prevail (section 2(3)). Additionally, it sets the quorum requirement at two-thirds of the members of the Special Tribunal (section 2(4)). The Act imposes specific obligations on the parties and entities it governs. Firstly, it mandates that decisions made by the Special Tribunal are to be based on the majority opinion of its members, ensuring that the majority view is considered the prevailing one (section 2(3)). If the members are equally divided, the Chairman's opinion takes precedence (section 2(3)). Furthermore, for any decision-making session to be valid, at least two-thirds of the Tribunal members must be present, establishing a quorum (section 2(4)). Breach of the Act’s provisions could lead to various legal consequences. While the Act itself does not explicitly outline specific offences or penalties for non-compliance, breaches of related legislative requirements or procedural rules could result in legal actions or administrative penalties. In broader legal contexts, failure to adhere to decision-making processes or quorum requirements might be subject to judicial review or other remedies available under the parent Act or other relevant legislation. The consequences would depend on the specific circumstances and any additional legislation that may apply.