Any construction regulator will require independence to ensure any changes in industrial relations are lawful
The current attention the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union (CFMEU) is getting in the media should not be a surprise to governments and those who have been in the industry.
Many in industry, including myself, have been warning the government over the last four years that changes in legislation and the implementation of policies – such as the Best Practice Industry Conditions – would allow the worst of the union movement to rise.
It is clear that our industry needs its own regulator, similar to other sectors such as banking, superannuation, corporations etc. It needs its own powers and independence to ensure industrial relations are conducted within the law by all participants.
Union movement
I am not anti-union. On the contrary, over many years working in both Victoria and Queensland I have had a very positive relationship with the union movement.
In fact, prior to me returning to university I was a member of the Building Workers’ Industrial Union (BWIU) and subsequently the CFMEU. All builders and labourers were subsequently covered after the deregistration of the Builders Labourers Federation (BLF) in Victoria.
I have seen the best and the worst of the union movement from both sides of the fence.
Good unions understand their membership and work tirelessly in improving wages and conditions for their members. They can be a beneficial partner of employers and industry adding value to common goals.
Part of the understanding is the sustainability of industry and the rule of law. Without good employers and an industry that doesn’t price itself out of existence, the ability to provide long-term continuous employment will be out of the question.
Unfortunately, this is where we are now. Without doubt the construction industry cannot and will not be able to afford the loss of productivity, disruption and pricing we are seeing now and be able to be a long-term proposition at sustainable volumes.
Unless there is a change, less infrastructure will be delivered, which in turn will mean less jobs in the sector.
Reality
It is a shame that governments feign surprise at the publicised behaviour of the CFMEU when in reality this is a result of their actions.
It is not new, and a quick review of history over the last 40 years reveals there have been four Royal Commissions into the building and construction industry.
- 1982: Winneke Royal Commission into the activities of the Builders Labourers Federation
- 1992: Gyles Royal Commission into the Productivity in the Building industry in NSW
- 2001: Cole Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry
- 2014: Heydon Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption
A common thread through the findings of these Royal Commissions is threats and acts of violence, intimidation, people not speaking up due to fear of reprisal, corruption, collusive arrangements, wilful defiance of the law and declining productivity.
Recommendations from these Royal Commissions have been implemented and unwound by successive governments.
Some in the union movement have called these Royal Commissions ‘witch hunts’ or biased against unions, however those who have read the reports will also see a thread of employers’ nonconformance throughout, aiding and abetting unlawful behaviour.
It seems it is approximately a 10-year cycle that issues in the building construction sector raise their heads.
Action
Whilst a Royal Commission to date has been ruled out, there is action from the Federal Government and the General Manager of the Fair Work Commission.
The Fair Work Commission’s general manager, Murray Furlong, has now initiated proceedings in the Federal Court under s.323 of the Fair Works Registered Organisations Act 2009 to appoint independent administrators to all branches of CFMEU, except Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory.
But it seems the general manager has reserved the right to bring proceedings against these branches at a later date. I suspect this will depend on evidence-based allegations of poor behaviour received.
This process will take some time, and the Federal Government and New South Wales state government have indicated that they will introduce legislation to help support the action. Others may follow.
There is a lot of water to pass under the bridge and the end result is not clear.
I wonder if this would be necessary if the changes to the federal industrial relations laws and the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) had not happened.
- Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter to receive the latest news in the earthmoving industry
- Never miss a great deal and subscribe to our monthly magazine
- Download a free copy of our latest digital magazine to catch up on the biggest news and developments in the earthmoving industry