← Back to home Browse all bills

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Removing Criminals from Worksites)

Current status

This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.

Policy area

Work & employment

What does this bill do?

People convicted of serious crimes carrying at least five years jail in Australia or overseas would be automatically barred from running for or holding office in a registered union or employer organisation.

Why was it introduced?

Criminal and corrupt conduct, including workplace law breaches, left people with serious records able to hold office in registered unionsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. and employer organisations. The bill expands disqualification, lets courts remove officials or target troubled branches, and allows deregistrationThe removal of an organisation's formal registered status, which is the harshest remedy in the bill. of organisations engaged in corrupt or unlawful activities.

Broader context

Under the existing registered organisationsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. rules, people could still hold office in unions or employer groups despite serious criminal conduct or repeated breaches of workplace and related laws, and courts had limited ways to intervene where problems were concentrated in a branch or group. This bill was introduced on 19 August 2024 to widen automatic disqualification, let the Federal CourtThe court that this bill would give power to disqualify officials, cancel registration, and make targeted orders against parts of an organisation. remove officials or target troubled parts of an organisation, and expand deregistrationThe removal of an organisation's formal registered status, which is the harshest remedy in the bill. powers, but it did not pass and lapsed when Parliament was dissolved on 28 March 2025.

Key criticism

After removing Senate speeches that belong to the separate No. 2 bill, the scoped record for this bill does not show a developed opposition case. The available material is mainly the sponsor’s and supporters’ case for removing people with serious criminal or misconduct records from worksites.

Who supported it?

Peter Dutton MP introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Liberal Party.

Introduced in House 19 Aug 2024
Failed in House 28 Mar 2025
Did not reach Senate —
Did not become law —

Did it become law?

No

The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.

Final passage

No final passage

The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.

Time before failure

221 days

From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding

Official record

View on APH

Parliament of Australia bill page

Meaning

What does this bill do?

  1. People convicted of serious crimes carrying at least five years jail in Australia or overseas would be automatically barred from running for or holding office in a registered union or employer organisation.

  2. The Federal CourtThe court that this bill would give power to disqualify officials, cancel registration, and make targeted orders against parts of an organisation. could ban a union or employer organisation official from office for a period it chooses if workplace law breaches, contempt, corporate misconduct, or other serious conduct make disqualification justified.

  3. Registered unionsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. or employer organisations could be deregistered if their officers act against members’ interests, treat members unfairly, or build a record of breaking core workplace and safety laws.

  4. The Federal CourtThe court that this bill would give power to disqualify officials, cancel registration, and make targeted orders against parts of an organisation. could punish only the troubled branch or group instead of shutting down the whole organisation by banning officers, excluding some members, or suspending rights and control over funds.

  5. A disqualified person could face up to two years jail or a fine for nominating for office, staying in office, or secretly controlling a registered union or employer organisation from behind the scenes.

Show source excerpts
  1. The insertion of the new paragraph 212(aa) expands the definition of prescribed offence to include an offence under a law of the Commonwealth, a State or Territory, or another country, punishable upon conviction by imprisonment for life or a period of five years or more. Section 215 provides that a person convicted, per section 213, of one of the prescribed offences set out in section 212 is disqualified from holding office (subject to the person making an application for leave to hold office or a reduced period of exclusion under sections 216 or 217).
    Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Removing Criminals from Worksites) explanatory memorandum
  2. New subsection 222(2) provides that the Federal Court can make an order disqualifying the person from holding office for any period the Court considers appropriate if the Court is satisfied that a ground for disqualification set out in the application applies to the person and the Court does not consider it would be unjust to disqualify the person. In determining whether disqualifying a person from office would be unjust, the Court is to have regard to:
    Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Removing Criminals from Worksites) explanatory memorandum
  3. New section 28C provides a ground for cancelling an organisation’s registration under new section 28, or making an alternative order under new section 28A where:
    Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Removing Criminals from Worksites) explanatory memorandum
  4. The alternative orders that the Federal Court can make are:
    Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Removing Criminals from Worksites) explanatory memorandum
  5. The maximum penalty for each of these offences is 100 penalty units ($21,000), two years imprisonment, or both. This ratio represents a departure from that set out in subsection 4B(2) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) but reflects the Final Report recommendation as to the appropriate penalty. Subsection 226(4) provides that for each of the offences in new section 226, where a person is disqualified as a result of an order made by the Court under either new section 28M or new section 222, strict liability will apply to that circumstance concerning whether or not the person was disqualified from holding office (the physical element).
    Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Removing Criminals from Worksites) explanatory memorandum

Context

Broader context for this bill

Under the existing registered organisationsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. rules, people could still hold office in unions or employer groups despite serious criminal conduct or repeated breaches of workplace and related laws, and courts had limited ways to intervene where problems were concentrated in a branch or group. This bill was introduced on 19 August 2024 to widen automatic disqualification, let the Federal CourtThe court that this bill would give power to disqualify officials, cancel registration, and make targeted orders against parts of an organisation. remove officials or target troubled parts of an organisation, and expand deregistrationThe removal of an organisation's formal registered status, which is the harshest remedy in the bill. powers, but it did not pass and lapsed when Parliament was dissolved on 28 March 2025.

  1. 19 Aug 2024

    Coalition introduces bill to widen bans on officials

    The bill was introduced in the House to stop people with serious criminal records or other serious misconduct from running or serving as officials in registered unionsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. and employer organisations.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  2. 19 Aug 2024

    Parliament begins debate on stronger court powers over organisations

    Second reading debate opened on proposals to let the Federal CourtThe court that this bill would give power to disqualify officials, cancel registration, and make targeted orders against parts of an organisation. disqualify officials, target troubled branches and expand grounds for deregistrationThe removal of an organisation's formal registered status, which is the harshest remedy in the bill. where unlawful or corrupt conduct was established.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗
  3. 28 Mar 2025

    Bill lapses when Parliament is dissolved

    The bill fell away at dissolution, leaving the proposed tougher disqualification, branch intervention and deregistrationThe removal of an organisation's formal registered status, which is the harshest remedy in the bill. powers unmade.

    Parliamentary timeline ↗

Legislative route

How did it move through Parliament?

House Senate
Introduced 19 Aug 2024

The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.

Introduced and read a first time

Second reading opened 19 Aug 2024

A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.

Second reading moved

Scrutiny of Bills review 11 Sept 2024

Considered by scrutiny committee (11/09/2024): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 11 of 2024

Considered by committee

APH bill page notes
Lapsed at dissolution 28 Mar 2025

The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.

Key criticism

The main case against this bill

After removing Senate speeches that belong to the separate No. 2 bill, the scoped record for this bill does not show a developed opposition case. The available material is mainly the sponsor’s and supporters’ case for removing people with serious criminal or misconduct records from worksites.

No substantive opposition case is evident in the scoped record once cross-bill debate material is excluded.

Votes

Recorded votes

No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.

Parliamentary debate

Who spoke, and what they said

Start here — lead voices

Sponsor speech Supports

Peter Dutton

Liberal Party • MP 19 Aug 2024

Dutton supports the bill and urges the House to back it, saying it is needed to remove criminal elements from worksites and restore the rule of law.

Read in Hansard ↗
Lead voice Supports

Michaelia Cash

Liberal Party • Senator 21 Aug 2024

Michaelia Cash strongly supports the bill and urges the Senate to pass it, arguing it is needed to disqualify criminal and repeat lawbreakers in registered organisationsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. and stop the CFMEUA large union in the construction sector that is repeatedly mentioned in the debate as the main example of the bill's target.'s unlawful conduct.

Read in Hansard ↗

All speeches by bloc

Coalition

2 speakers · 2 support

  1. Michaelia Cash ★ Michaelia Cash strongly supports the bill and urges the Senate to pass it, arguing it is needed to disqualify criminal and repeat lawbreakers in registered organisationsUnions and employer groups that are formally registered under the Fair Work system and are subject to extra rules about who can lead them and how they operate. and stop the CFMEUA large union in the construction sector that is repeatedly mentioned in the debate as the main example of the bill's target.'s unlawful conduct.
    “I urge all parties in this parliament to support these reforms.”

    Liberal Party • Senator • 21 Aug 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
  2. Peter Dutton ★ Dutton supports the bill and urges the House to back it, saying it is needed to remove criminal elements from worksites and restore the rule of law.
    “Yet still this parliament, this government, has refused to pass a law that seeks to remove these individuals from our worksites and protect people in small business when unions threaten, coerce and bully them. It has to change. There needs to be a restoration of the rule of law.”

    Liberal Party • MP • 19 Aug 2024

    Read the full speech in Hansard ↗

Record

Full record

Full chat