ACTU intervention threatens to delay CFMEU split

ACTU intervention threatens to delay bid by mining union to split from the CFMEU.

CFMEU National President Tony Maher.

The ACTU is seeking to frustrate the mining union’s bid to split from the CFMEU by opposing its legal argument for a secret ­ballot of members to vote on ­exiting the union.

The ACTU intervention in the Fair Work Commission proceedings means the peak union body has effectively sided with the CFMEU’s construction division in arguing against the mining ­division’s ballot application.

Mining division general president Tony Maher hit out at the construction division’s tactics, saying the stand-off meant the legal proceedings for a ballot ­application were “likely to be lengthy and complicated”.

The mining and energy division resolved in March to split from the union, declaring it had been overtaken by “macho posturing and chest-beating” and had never been less respected or more isolated within the union movement and the broader community. As the first union division to capitalise on the Coalition’s union demerger laws, about 300 delegates representing workers at mines, power stations and coal ports voted unanimously to apply to the commission to withdraw from the Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union.

In a surprise move, the ACTU intervened in the commission ­proceedings, arguing against the mining division’s interpretation of the union demerger legislation and backing the legal arguments of the CFMEU

The ACTU said the mining ­division’s interpretation would introduce very considerable uncertainty in the operation and constitution of organisations that were involved in amalgamations. “That fact is likely to operate as a disincentive for organisations to participate in amalgamations,” the ACTU said. It added that the adoption of the inter­pretation “would have serious ramifications for any organisations which have amalgamated or contemplate doing so”.

“The consequence of the applicant’s construction is that any amalgamation, however large or small, would result in each and every constituent part of an ­organisation being potentially the subject of an application for a withdrawal ballot … in the period between two years and five years following the amalgamation.”

The mining division, in its response, said the ACTU’s submission was “nothing more than partisan polemic that provides no assistance to the commission in undertaking the task of statutory construction before it”.

“The commission ought to have no regard to the submission,” it said. “In any event, the submission is … ­entirely subjective. Just as one can speculate that the ability to withdraw from amalgamations might be a disincentive to organisations amalgamating, it may also legitimately be viewed as encouraging other organisations to amalgamate in the knowledge they would be able to withdraw from a failed amalgamation.”

Mr Maher said while the proceedings focused on technicalities around terminology, definitions and rules, “the key takeout is the determination of the construction division to stop mining and energy members from having a say in their future”.

“The construction division is using its numbers to dominate the amalgamated CFMEU, that’s why we are seeking a pathway to independence,” he said.

 “Through the legal process, the construction division has shown us it will throw everything at stopping a ballot from proceeding and preventing our members from voting to stay in the CFMEU or form an independent union.”