Reporting Guidelines
General Press Release No. 127 (February 1991)

Ambit Claims - 2

The President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Mr Martin Ferguson, has asked the Australian Press Council to re-issue and widely publicise its statement of 27 July 1978 on press reporting of ambit claims. In that statement, the Council urged the press to respect the real purpose of ambit claims, and not hold a union up to ridicule simply because its ambit claims may appear excessive in existing circumstances. At the same time, the Council observed that where a union chooses to serve a log which looks absurd, even to a mind which appreciated its real purpose, it must in fairness accept the risk of being ridiculed.

It may well be that the answer to this difficulty lies in a reform of industrial relations law and practice. The pursuit of that reform is a matter for forums other than the Press Council.

It is worth recalling the background of ambit claims.

The function of a union claim for wages and conditions is not generally understood. An award in the federal sphere cannot be obtained unless there exists an industrial dispute extending beyond the limits of any one state. It is established that a "paper" dispute will suffice, that is to say a dispute created by the serving of a log of claims by a union and its non-acceptance by the employers upon whom it is served. Awards can be neither made nor varied otherwise than within the ambit of the dispute. Consequently, the practice has grown up for a union which looks ahead, beyond the award it hopes for initially, to the advantage of being able to seek future variations without going through the formalities of creating a new dispute. Claims in its initial log are therefore made so wide as to give scope for all foreseeable applications for variation. The result is that logs of claims are frequently expressed as seeking much higher wages and much more favourable conditions of work than the union has any intention of seeking immediately.

The difficulty a union could experience is that if it sets its sights too low it may be faced with the necessity on a future occasion, when circumstances may be very different, of having to go through the costly procedure of creating a new dispute.

It is only fair, therefore, that in reporting ambit claims the press conveys an understanding to readers of the reasons for making those claims.
 

Also on ambit claims: GPR 24.

return to
Index of guidelines

[ return to top ]