ABOUT TIME.. long over due and cant wait for the royal commission into these thug unions and crooks
THE Abbott government has vowed to break the “closed shop” between the nation’s major contractors and militant unions in the multi-billion-dollar construction sector by reviving a tough Work Choices-era building code that seeks to prevent employers getting commonwealth work if they strike workplace agreements that have “restrictive” practices.
Widening the Coalition’s assault on unions, Employment Minister Eric Abetz accused the country’s biggest builders of being “willing to play along” with the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union, claiming union agreements would not be imposed down the supply chain if head contractors were willing to stand up to union pressure.
National building watchdog Nigel Hadgkiss said yesterday it was a “widespread practice” for head contractors to strike agreements with unions and then require smaller contractors and sub-contractors to sign up to the same agreement if they wanted work on a project.
Contractors have complained that the union agreements were significantly more generous than their existing legal agreements with workers but they missed out on the project work unless they agreed to them.
Mr Hadgkiss, who is investigating complaints made by contractors against head contractors, said it was also common practice for head contractors to tell contractors to speak to a union about signing up to an enterprise agreement.
The Weekend Australian understands that the new national code, to be released shortly, will be based on the Howard government’s controversial 2006 guidelines that imposed restrictions on what employers could have in their workplace agreements if they wanted to secure commonwealth work.
Companies wanting government work would potentially be forced to remove clauses in agreements that relate to outsourcing, contracting, use of labour hire and union rights.
Senator Abetz said the current workplace arrangements between head contractors and unions were “a closed shop of no ticket, no start; no EBA, no contract”.
He said the government supported flexibility and freedom of association, not “this manic one-size-fits-all approach imposed by union bosses which contractors feel obliged to abide by”.
“Basically, what we are wanting to do is create a culture where head contractors actually do take responsibility in relation to the workplace relations issues,” he said. “The union power in relation to contractors and subcontractors being forced into EBAs is, in general terms, a result of head contractors willing to play along. If the head contractors were willing to withstand the pressure, then they wouldn’t then be forcing it downwards on to subcontractors.”
Changes to the code, which the Coalition foreshadowed before last year’s election, would need to be passed by the Senate, which is unlikely under its current make-up and would remain an uncertain prospect even when the new Senate convenes after July 1.
If the Coalition succeeds in changing the code, Senator Abetz said the government would use the changes to ensure that companies bidding for government work did not have agreements containing “restrictive work practices” but had the capacity to develop “specific tailored industrial solutions to individual projects”.
Clauses stating that contractors are to be engaged on terms and conditions no less favourable than those provided in an enterprise agreement applying to a project would be prohibited.
Senator Abetz said he empathised with head contractors who believed they were being “blackmailed” as project delays could leave them exposed to penalties.
“It is the sort of leadership and strength that we need from the project owners and the banks etcetera to assist head contractors not to succumb to that blackmail,” he said. “I would like to see (head contractors) give full expression to freedom of association, to not having a requirement that their subcontractors or contractors have specific union EBAs as a condition of engagement.
“You would have to ask yourself why would any head contractor make that a condition of engagement, and the only reason that one could come up with is their fear of trade union retribution.
“And so that is not, if you like, freedom of association; that is not allowing people to contract freely without outside interference.
“As a result, if unions seek to put industrial pressure on, the head contractor will be able to say: ‘Well, in those circumstances, I won’t be able to tender for government work.’ “
Dave Noonan, the national secretary of the CFMEU’s construction division, said the proposed code showed the government wanted to return to the Work Choices era. “It lays open the fact that they want to have a conservative holy war against workers and union,” Mr Noonan said.
Mr Hadgkiss, the Fair Work Building and Construction director, said his agency was investigating allegations from contractors that they had not been awarded work after refusing to sign up to a union-negotiated agreement.
He said the practice of head contractors not engaging contractors for not having a union agreement was discriminatory.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tony-abbott-vows-to-bust-union-stranglehold/story-f...
