High Court reveals every current judge is a member of Qantas' Chairman's Lounge

[kpc]

Absolutely speechless...there must be some serious conflict of interest here as Qantas appeals to the High Court re the 2021 decision in the Federal Court which found the airline business had contravened the Fair Work Act when it stood down employees working at 11 airports during the pandemic in November 2020.

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/high-court-reveals-every-current-judge-is-a-member-of-qantas-most-exclusive-club-in-australia/news-story/a2f9cd77c684320618392028968c709c

 

[mrsterryn]

That is mind blowing . That has to be a conflict

 

[Quickstatus]

But it is not OK for me to get a free pen from a drug manufacturer.???
They still can sponsor exhibits, meetings, conferences....

Here is a place to search if your medico got any largesse from a drug company
Im not sure if it is comprehensive but...

That has to be a conflict

Just "the appearance of..." is bad enough.....

 

[kpc]

No wonder why Joyce was so desperate to keep the names of CL members secret...it just stinks!!!

Edit...if the PM has any b..ls, he will demand that all Federal MPs including himself must relinquish their CL membership...then it will be up to the Opposition Leader to do the same!

 

[anat0l]

Why is anyone surprised here?

I know this looks like a cynical shot, but I wonder if the judges have access to VA's equivalent of CL. If they don't, I'm sure that if VA had the same or similar strength that QF did, they would have such membership.

Most if not all of the politicians, viz. decision makers, that could make material decisions about and/or affecting Qantas all have CL membership, including those who denounce the airline and/or Joyce. Why are we having this kind of shock realisation now?

 

[anat0l]

No wonder why Joyce was so desperate to keep the names of CL members secret...it just stinks!!!

Why would you publish a name of all of the CLs openly?

Not all of them are politicians, not all of them are evil, and not all of them would necessarily like to be outed, no matter how obvious their place within the membership may be.

Heck, why don't we just publish the names of all of the QF elites so they are openly accessible, including Silvers, Golds, Platinums, Platinum Ones and all Lifetime elites?

 

[Pushka]

Why is anyone surprised here?

I know this looks like a cynical shot, but I wonder if the judges have access to VA's equivalent of CL. If they don't, I'm sure that if VA had the same or similar strength that QF did, they would have such membership.

Most if not all of the politicians, viz. decision makers, that could make material decisions about and/or affecting Qantas all have CL membership, including those who denounce the airline and/or Joyce. Why are we having this kind of shock realisation now?

There are some positions in life that require absolute impartiality. I'd have thought a Judge, let alone a High Court Judge, might just be one of those.

 

[SheikYerbouti]

NSW government employees are not permitted to receive FF points or SCs when flying for work, because this is seen as receiving a perk at the taxpeyer's expense.

Travel and Transport Policy

A whole-of-government framework for official travel and transport taken by public officials using public money.

info.buy.nsw.gov.au

But this doesn't apply to NSW Govt MPs, and apparently not to Federal MPs, Judges, etc...

I guess the ban only applies to low-ranked workers, and it's fine for the senior/big earners to get the banned perks, because of course they're not in a position to allow this benefit to affect the interaction between government and business

 

[jrfsp]

Judgement is due tomorrow on the ground handlers case- will be very interesting to see if the previous ruling (of illegal sacking) is overturned

 

[Happy Dude]

Why is anyone surprised here?

I know this looks like a cynical shot, but I wonder if the judges have access to VA's equivalent of CL. If they don't, I'm sure that if VA had the same or similar strength that QF did, they would have such membership.

Most if not all of the politicians, viz. decision makers, that could make material decisions about and/or affecting Qantas all have CL membership, including those who denounce the airline and/or Joyce. Why are we having this kind of shock realisation now?

I for one don't see why a judge would need CL. Most people wouldn't know who they are from a bar of soap so it's not like they need "protection" from the public prior to getting on a plane. QF giving them CL can only be seen as an attempt to curry favour. Therefore, it's very reasonable to be surprised and shocked to learn of their CL membership.

 

[Quickstatus]

Fron the AIJA Guide to Judicial Conduct

See chapter 3

 

[anat0l]

There are some positions in life that require absolute impartiality. I'd have thought a Judge, let alone a High Court Judge, might just be one of those. Politicians on the other hand, well, they don't decide such important matters.

I can't imagine how "absolute impartiality" can be ensured. Sure, no CL would probably be closer to that objective, but we're only talking about one airline here and not any other kinds of interactions between a judge and services or even social circles. And it only so happens that these judges must make a decision for a party that so happens to now be in conflict.

Moreover, the article says that the legal representatives of the respective parties did not have objections when the judges' CL memberships were disclosed. You can decide if those legal representatives meet a level of moral standard to do their job, but so there.

NSW government employees are not permitted to receive FF points or SCs when flying for work, because this is seen as receiving a perk at the taxpeyer's expense.

Travel and Transport Policy

A whole-of-government framework for official travel and transport taken by public officials using public money.

info.buy.nsw.gov.au

But this doesn't apply to NSW Govt MPs, and apparently not to Federal MPs, Judges, etc...

I guess the ban only applies to low-ranked workers, and it's fine for the senior/big earners to get the banned perks, because of course they're not in a position to allow this benefit to affect the interaction between government and business

According to those guidelines (a quick read), it doesn't specifically say that FF points and SCs are precluded, but those cannot be used for personal purposes (so you can't use points for your personal vacation when those points have been earned via taxpayer funded travel).

It's a bit murkier when it comes to something like lounge access, which seems to say it is permitted but borne at personal expense. What if the airline gave it to you for free?

Anyway, I only had a quick read. I'm not in that system.

 

[kpc]

Not all of them are politicians, not all of them are evil, and not all of them would necessarily like to be outed, no matter how obvious their place within the membership may be.

To remove conflicts of interest like the one I just posted.
Remind me why Qf spend millions on a Chairman's Lounge?!

 

[SeatBackForward]

Would love to find out how judges have influence in their roles to influence decisions that benefit QF commercially. I mean that's the entire basis behind QF offering CL memberships right?

 

[Pushka]

I can't imagine how "absolute impartiality" can be ensured.

Of course it can't be assured. But we have to have systems in place to limit any opportunity for interference or bias or preference and this sure as heck does not do that.

 

[anat0l]

Fron the AIJA Guide to Judicial Conduct

See chapter 3

View attachment 343278

Well this would be most interesting if the decision favours Qantas.

There is the High Court of Appeals... I'm going to guess all the judges on that panel are also CL members?? Where are they going to find any without CL membership?

And I'm guessing all of those judges would try to assure you that their membership did not sway their judgement in any way. Odd conundrum, isn't it?

 

[Pushka]

Would love to find out how judges have influence in their roles to influence decisions that benefit QF commercially. I mean that's the entire basis behind QF offering CL memberships right?

You mean like when unions or individuals take their cases to the high court?

 

[Ade]

. Most people wouldn't know who they are from a bar of soap

Exactly. I believe, I'd not know someone of repute sitting next to me, unless I have seen them before or read about them in the news. Even then, it is highly unlikely that the average Joe would be able to recognize them. So why the secrecy and why shying away from the general public and seek solace in the CL? I could be wrong, but what do they think they are doing that warrants not mingling with gen pop?

 

[Ade]

NSW government employees are not permitted to receive FF points or SCs when flying for work, because this is seen as receiving a perk at the taxpeyer's expense.

Travel and Transport Policy

A whole-of-government framework for official travel and transport taken by public officials using public money.

info.buy.nsw.gov.au

But this doesn't apply to NSW Govt MPs, and apparently not to Federal MPs, Judges, etc...

I guess the ban only applies to low-ranked workers, and it's fine for the senior/big earners to get the banned perks, because of course they're not in a position to allow this benefit to affect the interaction between government and business

I thought SCs can be earnt, but no FF points? At least that's how Cth. WoAG policy is.

 

[anat0l]

To remove conflicts of interest like the one I just posted.
Remind me why Qf spend millions on a Chairman's Lounge?!

Of course it can't be ensured. But we have to have systems in place to limit any opportunity for interference or bias or preference and this sure as heck does not do that.

I believe what we have here is the classic failure of the pub test, then.