1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content

Laing O'Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd v AMWU CFMEU and CEPU


Case number: C2009/2349  
Applicant(s): Laing O’Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd 
Respondent(s): AMWU, CFMEU & CEPU 
Site: Darling Downs Power Station Construction Site, Dalby 
Jurisdiction: AIRC 
Before: Commissioner Spencer 
Hearing date:
19 & 20 March 2009
Intervention filed on: 19 March 2009 

The matter concerned an application by Laing O’Rourke Australia Construction Pty Ltd (the Company) for orders pursuant to s.496 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 to stop or prevent industrial action at the Darling Downs Power Station construction site where workers went on strike and imposed bans on certain overtime.

Workers employed by the Company on the site are covered by a Union Greenfields agreement which is in force until 2010. Industrial action by workers at the power station site in September 2008 resulted in the Australian Industrial Relations Commission making an order that industrial action stop and that employees return to work. That Order applied from 21 September 2008 to 25 November 2008.

The most recent industrial action occurred when workers employed by the Company on day shift walked off the job on Wednesday 17 March 2009 following a union meeting at the power station site. Following a further union meeting that day union representatives informed the company that night shift workers would not attend work on 17 March 2009 nor would day shift work be performed on Thursday 19 March 2009. When employees resumed work they informed the company that they wanted to discuss the question of performing “extra overtime” which they regarded as voluntary. The company found no employees willing to volunteer and regarded the employees’ position as industrial action.

In the course of proceedings, the company amended its application and sought an order only in relation to day shift employees. Late on 19 March 2009, the company issued directions to day shift workers that additional voluntary overtime in certain nominated areas be worked in order to remove some backlogs in critical areas. The Commission found that rather than having refused to obey the direction the employees had asked to discuss the matter.

Commissioner Spencer rejected the company’s application for an order as she was not satisfied that there was clear evidence of a refusal by the employees to work overtime which would have allowed her to be satisfied that industrial action was happening, threatened, impending or probable or being organised.