1800 wharfies at DP World stevedore to strike nationwide

About 1800 workers have given five days notice ahead of rolling strike action against stevedore DP World next week.

MUA Assistant National Secretary Warren Smith said workers are “extremely angry at DPW” for a plan to cancel a union-backed income protection scheme. Picture: Glenn Hunt/The Australian

About 1800 wharfies at DP World’s operations across the country will embark on industrial action, including strikes and indefinite work bans, from next week over the stevedore’s decision to cancel a union-backed income protection scheme.

A ballot of workers voted in favour of taking rolling industrial action, with indefinite bans to start being imposed from next Friday.

The delay to the start of the action is due to the Fair Work Commission requiring the Maritime Union of Australia to give five days’ notice of industrial action.

The proposed bans and strike action include bans on upgrades, bans on overtime and shift extensions, and a series of rolling work stoppages of between 1 and 24 hours.

MUA assistant national secretary Warren Smith said the union had notified of the implementation of indefinite work bans.

“If no resolution is reached, rolling strike action at all four major container terminals will commence in the coming weeks,’’ he said.

“This ballot has overwhelmingly endorsed wide-ranging industrial action. Workers are extremely angry at DPW for the attack on income protection and are prepared to use that action to achieve some justice.’

DP World said it been notified of the union’s intention to take industrial action at its Fremantle terminal from March 19 to March 25.

“Our first priority is our customers and we have made arrangements to minimise the impact of the planned industrial action,” the spokesman said

The company has cancelled negotiations which were due to recommence on 26 March given the industrial action.

“We have always been clear that we will not negotiate the EA under threat of or during industrial action,” he said

In a note to workers, DP World chief executive Glen Hilton said the business “cannot afford disruption caused by protected or unprotected industrial action”.

He said recent decisions by shipping lines along with a weak outlook for volume growth would continue to have a profound effect on the financial performance of the company.

He said the union’s claim for annual five per cent pay rises over the the next three years plus income protection wax ‘completely out of touch with the financial outlook of the company and unsustainable in our competitive industry, which includes other participants with much lower cost bases due to automated handling of containers’.

He said the company has offered to rollover the existing agreements and a 2.6 per cent pay rise.

DPWA will not support claims if they fail to better business outcomes in the form of improved service levels and the cost of operating the business.

‘A period of poor service levels over the coming months will continue to harm our ability to retain our existing volumes. I will not support an EA outcome that continues to disadvantage DPWA’s competitive position when compared to Patrick’s, HPH and VICT and ultimately jeopardising ongoing sustainability for you, our employees.

“Every one of you are witnessing the volume reductions first hand, particularly Melbourne. We will continue to make changes to our business in the coming months in order to improve our service levels and deliver our service in a cost effective and sustainable manner.”

Prebiously, DP World had accused the maritime union of threatening “spurious” industrial action.

The company said the current enterprise agreement, which is yet to be renegotiated — obliged the company to discontinue the ­income protection scheme on February 28.

In the absence of a new agreement, DP World said it would give employees a 2 per cent salary rise from March 1, which workers could use to pay for income protection themselves, a practice that operated before 2015.

DP World also offered to maintain the existing income protection scheme arrangements and give workers a 2.6 per cent pay rise if the union agreed to rollover the existing enterprise agreement and withdraw all its bargaining claims, including a ban on casuals, against the company. The proposal was rejected.

“In the context of an annual ­inflation rate of 1.8 per cent and enormous commercial pressure from some consolidated international shipping lines, we were genuinely surprised it was not considered more seriously by the union,’’ a company spokesman said.

“With an increasingly uncertain commercial outlook for our industry, we hope that the MUA will be mindful of DPWA employees and our customers when threatening spurious industrial action. DPWA leadership remain open to negotiating and hopeful of reaching a new enterprise agreement soon.”