Dealing with oil and gas unions

Abstract

Since the commencement of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act) on 1 July 2009, there has been a significant increase in union activity in Australia’s oil and gas industry. Recent case examples concerning the Pluto Project and various other disputes flag the importance of project managing industrial relations to ensure project delivery dates are met. Due to the contract interdependencies on large scale oil and gas projects, industrial action taken by a union in relation to a single sub-contractor can have ripple effects—causing budget blow-outs. Emerging union influence is such a concern that some of Australia’s leading companies operating in the oil and gas industry now identify industrial activity as a key project risk. Furthermore, many Australian leading financial institutions now assess a company’s potential exposure to industrial action as part of their key lending criteria. New innovative industrial relations strategies are now part of the weaponry Australian unions use when representing their members—this includes global union strategies. Moreover, there is already evidence that the FW Act can promote the occurrence of demarcation disputes between unions. This type of industrial activity leads to poor outcomes for employers and can prove to be very costly—especially in a multi-million dollar a day industry. Providing insight into the recent union activities in the industry are the following cases: Heath v Gravity Crane Services Pty Ltd Boskalis Australia Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia CFMEU v Woodside Burrup Pty Ltd Offshore Marine Services Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia There are a number of strategies oil and gas companies and sub-contractors can use to mitigate the effects of union influence in the workplace.