NSW Industrial Relations Commission bias query

By Kate Sikora

THE NSW State Government has asked if the president of the Industrial Relations Commission Justice Roger Boland should remove himself from presiding over the first public sector wages case — because he might be seen to be biased.

Justice Boland has previously been critical of the government for stripping the IRC’s powers in wage cases.

One of the first such cases is scheduled to begin today, with the Public Services Association arguing that the new laws are invalid and at the same time seeking a wage rise.

The Daily Telegraph has obtained a letter sent to Justice Boland on Wednesday asking him to consider whether he should preside over the case.

The letter sent by the Crown Solicitor’s office senior solicitor Peter Robinson said: “I am advised it is considered that your recent public statements . . . may give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias in the perception of a fair-minded lay observer.”

“As a matter of courtesy I am instructed to request that you consider whether you should disqualify yourself from further participation in these proceedings.”

Justice Boland, who became commissioner in 2008, in May publicly criticised the government over its public sector reforms, which capped public sector wage rises at 2.5 per cent unless savings could be found in departments to offset a further rise.

It also stripped the IRC’s powers, making it impossible to be an independent referee. The IRC must follow the government’s directions.

Mr Boland warned at the time that judges and tribunal members will be “placed in a straitjacket” as punishment for the government’s public sector wages blowout.

“What I strenuously object to is the government laying blame for the failure of its wages policy on the commission and using that as the excuse to shackle the commission’s independence,” he said.

Justice Boland’s office would not comment on the letter last night.

Public Service Association general secretary Steve Turner said the union case would test the validity of the new laws.

“Negotiations with the previous government broke down so in February we lodged a claim in the IRC,” he said.

“That claim is also running at the same time we are arguing the validity of the laws in another case.”

“I think tomorrow (the government) will argue that the invalidity case will need to be heard first before we can proceed with our claim.”

A spokesman for the Attorney-General and Justice Department, which oversees the Crown Solicitor’s Office, refused to comment.