Watchdog has firm, CFMEU in court

Hutchinson and the CFMEU face court action over a contractor who allegedly had its services cut because it did not have a union EBA.

The ACCC says the CFMEU told Hutchinson it would not permit WPI to work on the project­ because WPI did not have an enterprise agreement with the CFMEU.

The competition watchdog has launched court action against construction company Hutchinson and the CFMEU after a contractor allegedly had its services terminated because it did not have an enterprise agreement with the union.

The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission alleges Hutchinson terminated independent waterproofing subcon­tract­or WPI to avoid conflict with, or industrial action by, the CFMEU at the Southpoint Apartments construction project in South Brisbane in 2016.

ACCC chairman Rod Sims said the regulator viewed the alleged­ conduct as very serious and the CFMEU playing a “gatekeeper role” for the construction industry had economic implications. The maximum penalty is $750,000.

WPI entered into a contract to supply waterproofing services to Hutchinson for the Southpoint project, and supplied services from April 29 to June 2016.

The ACCC says the CFMEU told Hutchinson it would not permit WPI to work on the project­ because WPI did not have an enterprise agreement with the CFMEU. It allegedly threatened to engage in indust­rial action if Hutchinson let WPI keep working on the project.

According to a statement filed in the Federal Court, the ACCC alleges CFMEU organiser Justin Steele complained the union had not been consulted before WPI was appointed.

Hutchinson project manager Peter Meland allegedly told WPI director Ray Hadfield that Hutchinson had “problems” with the CFMEU; the union would not let WPI work on the project; WPI would not be able to continue working on the project unless it obtained a CFMEU deal; and Mr Meland would try to get WPI a union agreement.

Mr Steele allegedly told Mr Meland that Mr Hadfield “won’t be doing your waterproofing (because­) he won’t be able to get an EBA”, and suggested Hutchinson instead engage another company, Spanos, which had a union agreement. Hutchinson engaged Spanos and terminated the WPI contract.

The ACCC alleges Hutchinson contravened sections 45E and 45EA of the Competition and Consumer Act, which prohibit contracts, arrangements or understandings for the purpose of preventing or hindering the acquisition of goods or services.

It further alleges the CFMEU induced or was knowingly concerned in the contraventions.