Industrial Dispute Report: Oaky Creek Coal Mine and CFMEU Analysis

This report analyzes the industrial dispute between Oaky Creek Coal Mine and the CFMEU during 2017-2018. The report provides an executive summary, introduction, and details the nature of the dispute, including the arguments of both Glencore (Oaky Creek Coal's parent company) and the CFMEU. It outlines the proposed enterprise agreements by both parties and evaluates the effectiveness of the Fair Work Commission in resolving the conflict. The commission's role in facilitating negotiations, issuing orders (like the suspension of the lockout), and the eventual employee vote on the enterprise agreement are discussed. The report concludes by examining the outcomes and implications of the dispute resolution process, highlighting the significance of the Fair Work Commission's intervention and the final agreement reached.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 1
An Industrial Dispute Report between Oaky Creek Coal Mine and CFMEU
Name
Institution

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 2
Executive summary
The report aims at providing an analysis of the industrial dispute between the Oaky Creek
Coal Pty Company and the construction, Forestry, Mining, and Energy Union (CFMEU) in the
year 2017 and 2018. It also seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of the Fair Work Commission in
solving the dispute as well as provide a recommendation as to whether the commission has
higher power to intervene in such type of a difference. It will also provide an understanding of
different concepts used or employed by the Commission in dispute resolution. The report is
addressed to the president of the fair work commission.
Introduction
Industrial disputes have become common in the modern working environments. The
prevalence of industrial cases in the global market has increased and hence increasing concerns
about the effectiveness of fair and work commission in handling the disputes (Wright &
Lansbury, 2014). According to the Australian Industrial dispute Act, 1947, industrial disputes
have been defined as a difference or disagreement between employers and employers, employer
and workers, workers with fellow workers. Industrial arguments can also be the current
disagreements between employers and employee representatives which in this case refer to the
trade unions. Most industrial disputes arise overpay or even over the working conditions and can
result in industrial actions. The Fair work commission is an Australian Tribunal that deals with
work relations (McCrystal, 2014). CFMEU is the Australian leading trade union in construction,
Maritime, mining, forestry, energy, clothing, and textile as well as footwear production. The
union has been facing several legal actions from the commission about industrial disputes (De
Prins et al., 2018). For instance, in the year 2014 according to the Sydney Morning Gerald

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 3
Newspaper, the union and some officials from the union were charged or fined by the Federal
Court of Australia $590 800 after legal actions was taken by the commission. The behavior of the
union and its officials in relation to work relations was questioned and found to be centrally to
the regulations of the Fair Work Act.
The nature of 2017 and 2018 industrial dispute between Oaky Creek Coal Pty limited and
the CFMEU
Oaky Creek Coal Pty Limited is a coal mining company that was established in the year
1982 and experienced its primary saleable coal production in the year 1983. The company is
based in Central Queensland in Australia and produces two premium quality as well as medium
volatile cooking gas. It works under the umbrella of the Glencore Group which is one of the
largest diversified global natural resource companies and is also a major producer as well as
marketer of more than 90 commodities. The company has an annual production of 15.9 million
tonnes run of mine coal. Since the year 2017, the company has engaged in several industrial
disputes with the construction, Forestry, Mining, and Energy Union (Eklund, 2015). The
discussion started with a statement that was made by the CFMEU national secretary Michael
O’Connor in a meeting with Oaky North employees where he was quoted saying that the
CFMEU officials were there because they had a broken IR system as well as unfavorable laws
which stacked against them and therefore they had to do something like the union officials
(Pekarek & Gahan, 2016). He further said that this was their appropriate time to take action and
that the North Oaky employees were leading in their work. According to Glencore Group, such
statement expressed a form of attack to the Oaky North employees and company at large.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 4
On 10th of January 2018, in a meeting with the deputy president of the Fair Work
Commission, the CFMEU officials had shaken hands with the Oaky Creek Coal limited
representatives on a new enterprise agreement developed about the Fair Work Act (Lewin &
Gollan, 2018). The deputy president Asbury also recommended that all the parties should
support the proposed new enterprise agreement. The new proposed enterprise agreement for the
Oaky North was fair and reasonable. According to the enterprise agreement;
 It protected the rights of the work as outlined in the Fair Work Act
 The deal also maintained an annual wage of approximately $ 1 180 000 per annum
 It also proposed a wage increment of 8.24% over four years of employment
 The agreement also took care of housing consideration by maintaining an accumulated
rent at $ 15.50 per week for 2 to 4 bedroom houses as well as $ 24.00 per week for the
single rooms per person all inclusive of meals and service charges.
Glencore Disputing arguments
According to Glencore, the CFMEU members at the North Oaky walked away from the
handshake deal and a return to work by voting against the agreement. It is the CFMEU members
at the Oaky North who are holding industrial actions and been supported by the CFMEU
officials. After walking away from the handshake, the CFMEU officials have continued to accept
public donations for members working with the Oaky North Creek Coal Company who receive $
1600 per week from the union (Sarkar, 2017). They also collect approximately $ 300 per week in
coal bonuses from the company for work done by the abused members who travel to and from
work. The dispute, therefore, did arise from the failure to deliver on their prior handshake about
the new proposed enterprise agreement and the continued efforts of CFMEU officials to pay their

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 5
member to maintain the Oaky North Picket Line. By going against the provided regulations
under the Enterprise Agreement made the Oaky North Creek Coal Mine Company feel that the
union officials were not supporting the agreement but were pushing for their own interests and
under the provision given by targeting the Company employees.
CFMEU Disputing Arguments
On the other hand, CFMEU argues that Glencore is attempting to pressure the Oaky
North contractors as well as the workers to perform the work of the employees who are taking
part in the industrial, legal actions. In support of the CFMEU official’s argument, the deputy
president of the Fair work Commission added that he received direct complaints from employees
who had been engaged by contractor HD mining claiming to have been threatened with
termination of employment (Elgar & Simpson, 2017). The deputy president of the commission
has provided that the Glencore threatening behavior is unacceptable and that the company should
take a look at their way of treating workers. The ongoing aggressive behavior by Glencore and
contracting companies according to the CFMEU officials is termed as a deplorable situation and
provides that if the action continues then they will be forced to look at the available options with
the aim of holding the contacting companies as well as Glencore into account (Watson, 2017).
Despite the ongoing industrial actions the union maintains that workers should not be threatened
for not performing duties which are supposed to be done by the workers who are fighting for
their rights through industrial actions (Preston, 2017). They argue that it is high time that the
company agrees to provide their workers with the necessary conditions and entitlement which
are being sought by the union.
Proposed enterprise Agreement by CFMEU Officials

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 6
The CFMEU officials argue that the prior enterprise agreement provides an opportunity
for remuneration review based on business performance and the existing market conditions. Such
a provision provides the employees with a chance for wage review (Forsyth et al., 2017).
Therefore the union has proposed an increase in the weekly charges to $ 30 for the duplex houses
and $ 48 for accommodation for single persons. This is contrary to the initial enterprise
agreement that the company considers to be favorably provided for a weekly rent of $ 15.50 for
the duplex houses and $ 24.00 for the single person’s accommodation.
The union officials have also proposed that employees should receive $ 5700 annually
with a minimum payment requirement of 6 weeks or $ 11,400 for any other period of service to
the company. This was contrary to the previous agreement which provided a wage increase of
8.24% over four years. Finally, the CFMEU officials also proposed that the employees are
legible to receive up to $ 8000 for reimbursement and relocation expenses (Preston, 2018).
However, under their new proposal, there is no material change to the new enterprise agreement.
From the above proposed new enterprise deal, the company argues that the CFMEU
officials are taking advantage of the nature of the enterprise agreement under the Fair Work
Agreement. The officials aim to have a dig at the company and affect their performance and not
to support the prior established handshake between the company and the CFMEU officials in
front of the Fair and Work Commission deputy president (Borland, 2017). It is, therefore, the
responsibility of the commission to help in settling the disputes since no party to the conflict is
willing to reach an agreement by engaging the disputing parties, analyzing the issues of conflict
and providing a solution by taking a decision or using its powers to make an order.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 7
The effectiveness of the Fair and Work Commission in resolving the dispute
The fair work commission is an established tribunal that has been developed to maintain
workplace relations. It acts as an independent body and has the power to carry our various
functions about industrial disputes. The commission is mandated to provide safety of minimum
conditions in the workplace including wages and salaries (Oliver & Yu, 2017). In bargaining
circumstances, the commission is required to facilitate a good faith and develop an enterprise
agreement. It administers regulation services for industrial actions and also deals with any
employee complaints about unfair dismissal. Finally, the tribunal is mandated with the task of
resolving a range of collective as well as individual disputes through the mediation process and
also through a public tribunal hearing.
The prior statements from the deputy vice president of the commission despite
recommending the parties to support the enterprise agreement were not fair. In a way, they were
helping the arguments of the CFMEU officials by making a supportive statement that he has
received individual complaints from employees who had been engaged by HD Contracting
Company to have received threats of termination of their employment contract (Power, 2017).
The role of the commission is to act as an independent body, and therefore it was not appropriate
for the deputy president to alter such statements despite the relevance as they were used to
increase the magnitude of the industrial actions despite the ongoing dispute resolution
mechanisms.
However, the commission was able to make a ruling on the ongoing industrial actions
and dispute between these two parties which had become more prolonged, and there was a need
to restore the mining activities at the Oaky North Coal mines (White, 2017). The commission

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 8
played a significant role in engaging both parties in a bid to resolve the differences. The
commission gave an order which required the suspension of the lockout for a period starting
from March 2018 to provide an opportunity for the employees to vote on a new enterprise
agreement (Bray & Power, 2017). Such a decision by the commission was beneficial in that it
acted in good faith and played its role as an independent party in the dispute and also gave the
responsibility of making the right decision to the most affected group by the industrial actions in
this case the Oaky North Coal Mine employees.
After giving the order by the commission, the employees had the opportunity to vote for
the proposed new enterprise agreement. The results of the voting by the workers of Oaky North
Coal mine were in favor of the latest enterprise agreement offered by their employer, Glencore
(Bryan et al., 2017). Such a decision was welcomed by all parties including the CFMEU officials
and the Australian leadership led by Michelle Landry who congratulated both parties for coming
into an agreement as well as appreciating the role played by the Fair Work Commission in
resolving the conflict.
The decision or order by the commission was therefore useful in providing a solution for
the industrial dispute that started back in 2017 and had a significant impact on the operational
and production activities of the company. The commission acted independently without hanging
or being bias to one party to provide a solution that was best for the parties despite favoring the
company (Smith, 2017). The commission decision or order showed the ability of the commission
to use its powers in arriving at a conclusive decision on matters relating to workplace relations.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU 9
Recommendation
The Fair Work commission should have higher powers to make decisions on such
disputes. In this case, the commission was able to involve the parties and allows the employees
to make the best choice. The commission, therefore, acted as a third party to the dispute
resolution process.
With more significant powers, the company should have dealt with dispute without
having to prolong the discussions with the parties which had a significant impact on mining
operations (Allen & Landau, 2018). Since the commissioners were present during the handshake
between the CFMEU officials and the Company representatives on the newly developed
enterprise agreement, the commission should have used the provisions of the contract as binding
and identify the party which was not complying to the handshake which in this case was the
CFMEU officials.
Conclusion
Industrial disputes are widespread in the modern corporate world and have contributed to
increased industrial actions. Industrial actions contributed to reduced business operations and
performance and also affect the employee’s productivity. CFMEU is the Australian leading trade
union in construction, Maritime, mining, forestry, energy, clothing, and textile as well as
footwear production. The union has been facing several legal actions from the commission about
industrial disputes. The establishment of the Fair Work Commission in every country plays a
significant role in helping to resolve industrial actions and provide practical solutions to
workplace relations. However, there is need to give the commission greater powers to enable

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU
10
them to determine and make decisions even for the most sensitive or critical issues of conflict
between employers and the employee's trade union.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU
11
References
Allen, D., & Landau, I. (2018). Major court and tribunal decisions in Australia in 2017. Journal
of Industrial Relations, 0022185618759746.
Borland, J. (2017). Overview of research to inform the Annual Wage Review 2016-17.
Bray, A., & Power, C. (2017). The fair work commission's' new approach'. Precedent (Sydney,
NSW), (141), 27.
Bryan, D., Rafferty, M., Toner, P., & Wright, S. (2017). Financialisation and labour in the
Australian commercial construction industry. The Economic and Labour Relations
Review, 28(4), 500-518.
De Prins, P., Stuer, D., & Gielens, T. (2018). Revitalizing social dialogue in the workplace: the
impact of a cooperative industrial relations climate and sustainable HR practices on
reducing employee harm. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-
21.
Eklund, E. (2015). Mining in Australia: An historical survey of industry–community
relationships. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(1), 177-188.
Elgar, J., & Simpson, B. (2017). The impact of the law on industrial disputes revisited: A
perspective on developments over the last two decades. Industrial Law Journal, 46(1), 6-
22.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE REPORT BETWEEN OAKY CREEK COAL MINE AND CFMEU
12
Forsyth, A., Howe, J., Gahan, P., & Landau, I. (2017). Establishing the Right to Bargain
Collectively in Australia and the UK: Are Majority Support Determinations under
Australia’s Fair Work Act a More Effective Form of Union Recognition? Industrial Law
Journal, 46(3), 335-365.
Lewin, D., & Gollan, P. J. (Eds.). (2018). Advances in Industrial and Labor Relations, 2017:
Shifts in Workplace Voice, Justice, Negotiation and Conflict Resolution in Contemporary
Workplaces. Emerald Publishing Limited.
McCrystal, S. (2014). Industrial legislation in Australia in 2013. Journal of Industrial Relations,
56(3), 331-344.
Oliver, D., & Yu, S. (2017). The Australian labour market in 2016. Journal of Industrial
Relations, 59(3), 254-270.
Pekarek, A., & Gahan, P. (2016). Unions and collective bargaining in Australia in 2015. Journal
of Industrial Relations, 58(3), 356-371.
Power, C. (2017). The Fair Work Commission's new approach. Governance Directions, 69(9),
540.
Preston, A. (2017). Submission to the Government of Western Australia Ministerial Review of
the State Industrial Relations System.
Preston, A. (2018). The structure and determinants of wage relativities: evidence from Australia.
Routledge.