Workplace free speech is a hot topic
right now. In the last year we've seen
the Banerji case in the High Court of
Australia involving a tweeting public
servant and the Israel Folau case and
his Instagram posts, but plenty of
uncertainty remains. It's unclear where
the line is drawn between the rights of
employers to protect their reputation,
the rights of the government to have a
neutral workforce, and the rights of
employees to express their political opinions.
So the Banerji decision of the High
Court's really important. It is the first
decision where the High Court has
addressed free speech in the workplace
under the doctrine known as freedom of
political communication. It raises really
important issues that relate to
employment in the public service and the
nature of the public service, but also
problems around certainty that employees
need to have in the way that they
understand their obligations 
in the workplace.
The issue of 
free speech at
work has become being a critical issue
in the labour market in recent decades
because of the increasing encroachment
on the human rights of employees that
are being imposed on them by employment contracts.
Those restrictions apply to important
rights to participate in democracy; they
affect free speech, they affect sexuality,
they affect religion and religious
expression as we've seen in recent times.
And what we are seeing as a result of a
series of three important, high-profile
cases is that commercial imperatives
are being used to subjugate the human
rights of employees in 
workplaces across Australia.
I am a scholar of constitutional law and I'm really
looking forward to the opportunity to
talk about these issues with experts in
human rights and in employment law,
and I think that that will be a really
fascinating and productive conversation.
I hope you can join us for this timely
webinar where we'll be discussing these
issues with a distinguished panel before
taking your questions.
